Skip to main content

Full text of "The works of John Owen"

See other formats


• 


1'I{INCET0jS\  N.  J. 

No.  Ca,v,  ~^m^ ^- - 

No.  Shelf. Se^cS^.. 

No.  Book,  y      ,.     \v 


) 


• 


■SL 


THE 


WORKS  ^ 


OF 


y 
JOHN    OWEN,    D.D 


EDITED 

BY  THOMAS  RUSSELL,  M.A. 


MEMOIRS   OF    HIS    LIFE   AND    WRITINGS, 
BY  WILLIAM  ORME. 


VOL.   IX. 

CONTAINING 

A  CONTINUATION  OF 

VINDICIvE  EVANGELIC^:  OR,  THE  MYSTERY  OF  THE  GOSPEL  VINDICATED; 

OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST,  AND  OF  JUSTIFICATION  ; 

A  REVIEW  OF  THE  ANNOTATIONS  OF  HUGO  GROTIUS ;  AND 

A  DISSERTATION  ON  DIVINE  JUSTICE. 


LONDON: 

PRINTED  FOR  RICHARD  BAYNES,  28,  PATERNOSTER  ROW: 

And  sold  by  J.  Parker,  Oxford  ;  Deighton  and  Sons,  Cambridge  ;  D.  Brown, 
Wangli  and  Innes,  and  FI.  S.  Baynes  and  Co.  Edinburgh  ;  Clialmers  and 
Collins,  and  M.  Ogle,  Glasgow;  M.  Ktene,  and  R.  M.  Tiras,  Dublin. 

1826. 


CONTENTS 


THE    NINTH    VOLUME. 


VINDJCI^  EVANGELIC^. 

/ 

CHAP.  XX. 

Page 
Of  the  priestly  office  of  Christ ;  how  he  was  a  priest ;  when  he  entered  on  this 
office ;  and  how  he  dischargeth  it    1 

CHAP.  XXI. 

Of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  causes,  ends  and  fruits  thereof,  with  an  entrance  into 
the  doctrine  of  his  satisfaction  thereby - 19 

CHAP.  XXII. 

The  several  considerations  of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  to  the  expiation  of  our  sins 
thereby,  and  the  satisfaction  made  therein:  First,  of  it  as  a  price.  Secondly, 
as  a  sacrifice -• 28 

CHAP.  XXIII. 

Of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  punishment,  and  the  satisfaction  made 
thereby « •  •  • 46 

CHAP.  XXIV. 

Some  particular  testimonies  evincing  the  death  of  Christ  to  be  a  punishment, 
properly  so  called 58 

CHAP.   XXV. 

A  digression  concerning  the  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah  :  and  the  vindication 
of  it  from  the  perverse  interpretation  of  Hugo  Grotius   74 

CHAP.  XXVI. 
Of  the  matter  of  the  punishment  that  Christ  underwent,  or  what  he  suffered  •  •  •   110 

CHAP.   XXVII. 

Of  the  covenant  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  the  ground  and  founda- 
tion of  this  dispensation  of  Christ's  being  punished  for  us,  and  in  our 
stead    ■ ^''^^ 


IT  CONTENTS. 

Page 
CHAP.  XXVIII. 
Of  redemption  b^  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  price  or  ransom   139 

CHAP.  XXIX. 

Of  reconciliation  by  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  is  a  sacrifice 168 

CHAP.  XXX. 

The  satisfaction  of  Christ,  on  the  consideration  of  his  death  being  a  punish- 
ment, farther  evinced ;  and  vindicated  from  the  exceptions  of  Smalcius  •  •  •  •    182 

CHAP.  XXXI. 

Of  election  and  universal  grace.  Of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead  •  •    194 

CHAP.  XXXII. 
Of  justification  and  faith • 206 

CHAP.  XXXIII. 

Of  keeping  the  commandments  of  God  :  and  of  perfection  of  obedience,  how 
attainable  in  this  life • 210 

CHAP.  XXXIV. 

Of  prayer :  and  whether  Christ  prescribed  a  form  of  prayer  to  be  used  by  be- 
lievers :  and  of  praying  unto  him,  and  in  his  name,  under  the  Old  Testament  226 

CHAP.  XXXV. 

Of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  state  of  the  wicked  at  the  last  day  •  •  •   232 

Of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  of   justification    244 

A    REVIEVr    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS    OF    HuGO    GrOTIUS     293 

A  DISSERTATION  ON  DIVINE  JUSTICE. 

Recommendatory  Preface 321 

The  Preface  to  the  Reader 323 

CHAP.  I. 

The  introduction.  The  design  of  the  work.  AUieists.  The  prolepsis  of  divine 
justice  general.  The  divisions  of  justice,  according  to  Aristotle.  The  senti- 
ments of  the  schoolmen  respecting  tliese.  Another  division.  Justice  consi- 
dered absolutely.     Then  in  various  respects    343 

CHAP.  II. 

The  universal  justice  of  God.  The  idle  fancies  of  the  schoolmen.  The  argu- 
ments of  Durandus  against  commutative  justice.  Suarez's  censure  of  the 
scholastic  reasonings.  His  opinion  of  divine  justice.  The  examination  of 
it.  A  description  of  universal  justice  from  the  Sacred  Writings.  A  division 
of  it  in  respect  of  its  egress.     Rectitude  of  government  in  God,  what,  and 


CONTENTS.  V 

Page 
of  wliat  kind.     Definitions  of  the  philosophers  and  lawyers.     Divisions  of 
the  justice  of  government.    A  caution  respecting  these.    Vindicatory  justice. 
The  opinions  of  the  partisans.     An  explication  of  the  true  opinion.     Who 
the  adversaries  are.     The  state  of  the  controversy  farther  considered 249 

CHAP.  III. 

A  series  of  arguments  in  support  of  vindicatory  justice.  First,  from  the  Scrip- 
tures. Three  divisions  of  the  passages  of  Scripture.  The  first  contains  those 
which  respect  the  purity  and  holiness  of  God.  The  second,  those  which  re- 
spect God  as  the  judge.  What  it  is  to  judge  with  justice.  The  third,  those 
which  respect  the  divine  supreme  right.  A  second  argument  is  taken  from 
the  general  consent  of  mankind.  A  threefold  testimony  of  that  consent. 
The  first  from  the  Scriptures.  Some  testimonies  of  the  heathens.  The  se- 
cond, from  the  power  of  conscience.  Testimonies  concerning  that  power. 
The  mark  set  upon  Cain.  The  expression  of  the  emperor  Adrian,  when  at 
the  point  of  death.  The  consternation  of  mankind  at  prodigies.  The  horror 
of  tlie  wicked,  whom  even  fictions  terrify.  Two  conclusions.  The  third  tes- 
timony, from  the  confession  of  all  nations.  A  vindication  of  the  argument 
against  Rutherford.  TLc  regard  paid  to  sacrifices  among  the  nations.  Dif- 
ferent kinds  of  the  same.     Propitiatory  sacrifices.     Some  instances  of  them    364 

CHAP.  IV. 

The  origin  of  human  sacrifices.  Their  use  among  the  Jews,  Assyrians,  Ger- 
mans, Goths,  the  inhabitants  of  Marseilles,  the  Normans,  the  Francs,  the 
Tyrians,  the  Egyptians,  and  the  ancient  Gauls.  Testimonies  of  Cicero  and 
Cffisar,  that  they  were  used  among  the  Britons  and  Romans  by  the  Dmids. 
A  fiction  of  Appio,  concerning  the  worship  in  the  temple  of  Jerusalem.  The 
names  of  some  persons  sacrificed.  The  use  of  human  sacrifices  among  the 
Gentiles,  proved  from  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassia, 
Porphyry,  Philo,  Eusebius,  Tertullian,  Euripides.  Instances  of  human  sa- 
crifices in  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  The  remarkable  obedience  of  Abraham. 
What  the  neighbouring  nations  might  have  gathered  from  that  event.  Why 
human  sacrifices  were  not  instituted  by  God.  The  story  oflphigenia.  The 
history  of  Jephtha.  Whether  he  put  his  daughter  to  death.  The  cause  of 
the  difficulty.  The  impious  sacrifice  of  King  Moab.  The  abominable  su- 
perstition of  (be  Rugiani.  The  craftiness  of  the  devil.  Vindications  of  the 
argument.     The  same  concluded    • 379 

CHAP.  V. 

The  third  argument.  This  divine  attribute  demonstrated  in  the  works  of  Pro- 
vidence. That  passage  of  the  apostle  to  the  Romans,  chap.  i.  18.  considered. 
Anger,  what  it  is.  The  definitions  of  the  philosophers.  The  opinion  of 
Lactantius  concerning  the  anger  of  God.  Anger  often  ascribed  to  God  in 
the  Holy  Scriptures.  In  what  sense  this  is  done.  The  divine  anger  denotes, 
1.  The  effects  of  anger.  2.  The  will  of  punishing.  What  that  will  is  in 
God.  Why  the  justice  of  God  is  expressed  by  anger.  The  manifestation  cf 
the  divine  anger,  what  it  is.  How  it  is  revealed  from  heaven.  The  sum  of 
the  argument.  The  fourth  argument.  Vindicatory  justice  revealed  in  the 
cross  of  Christ.  The  attributes  of  God.  How  displayed  in  Christ.  Heads 
of  other  arguments.     The  conclusion   ,•  399 


yi  CONTENTS. 

Page 

CHAP.  VI. 

Another  head  of  the  first  part  of  the  dissertation.  Arguments  for  the  necessary 
egress  of  vindicatory  justice  from  the  supposition  of  sin.  The  first  argument. 
God's  hatred  of  sin,  what.  Whether  God  by  nature  hates  sin,  or  because 
he  wills  so  to  do.  Testimonies  from  Holy  Scripture.  Dr.  Twiss's  answer. 
The  sum  of  it.  The  same  obviated.  The  relation  between  obedience  as  to 
reward,  and  sin  as  to  punishment,  not  the  same.  Justice  and  mercy,  in  re- 
spect of  their  exercise,  different.  The  second  argument.  The  description 
of  God  in  the  Scriptures,  in  respect  of  sin.  In  what  sense  he  is  called  a  con- 
suming fire.     Twiss's  answer  refuted.     The  fallacies  of  the  answer 409 

CHAP.  VII. 

The  tliird  argument.  The  non-punishment  of  sin  is  contrary  to  the  glory  of 
God's  justice.  Likewise  of  his  holiness  and  dominion.  A  fourth  argument. 
The  necessity  of  a  satisfaction  being  made  by  the  death  of  Christ.  No  ne- 
cessary cause,  or  cogent  reason  for  the  death  of  Christ,  according  to  the  ad- 
versaries. The  objection  refuted.  The  use  of  sacrifices.  The  end  of  the 
first  part  of  the  dissertation ■ 415 


PART   11. 

CHAP.  VIII. 

Objections  of  the  adversaries  answered.  The  Racovian  catechism  particularly 
considered.  The  force  of  the  argument  for  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  from 
punitory  justice.  The  catechists  deny  that  justice  to  be  inherent  in  God. 
And  also  sparing  mercy.  Their  first  argument  weighed  and  refuted.  Jus- 
tice and  mercy  are  not  opposite.  Two  kinds  of  the  divine  attributes.  Their 
second  and  third  arguments,  with  the  answers  annexed   4^3 

CHAP.  IX. 

Crellius  taken  to  task.  His  first  mistake.  God  doth  not  punish  sins  as  being 
endowed  with  supreme  dominion.  The  first  argument  of  Crellius.  Tlie  an- 
swer. The  translation  of  punishment  upon  Christ,  in  what  view  made  by 
God.  Whether  the  remission  of  sins,  without,  a  satisfaction  made,  could  take 
place,  without  injury  to  him  to  whom  punishment  belongs.  Whetlier  every 
one  can  resign  his  right.  Right  twofold.  The  right  of  debt,  what :  and  what 
that  of  government.  A  natural  and  positive  right.  Positive  right,  what :  a 
description  also  of  natural  right.     Concessions  of  Crellius 427 

CHAP.  X. 

The  opinions  of  Socinus  considered.  What  he  thought  of  our  present  question, 
viz.  that  it  is  the  hinge  on  which  the  whole  controversy,  concerning  the  sa- 
tisfaction of  Christ  turns.  His  vain  boasting,  as  if  having  disproved  this  vin- 
dicatory justice,  he  had  snatched  the  prize  from  his  adversaries.  Other  clear 
proofs  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ.  That  it  is  our  duty  to  acquiesce  in  the  re- 
vealed will  of  God.  The  truth  not  to  be  forsaken.  Mercy  and  justice  not 
opposite.  Vain  distinctions  of  Socinus  concerning  divine  justice.  The  con- 
sideration of  these  distinctions.     His  first  argument  against  vindicatory  jus- 


CONTENTS.  vii 

Page 
tice.    The  solution  of  it.     The  anger  and  severity  of  God,  what.     Universal 
and   particular  justice,  in  what  they  agree.     'J'he  false  reasoning  and  vain 
boasting  of  the  adversary    433 

CHAP.  XI. 

The  arguments  of  Socinus  against  punitory  justice  weighed.  A  false  hypothesis 
of  his.  Sins,  in  what  sense  they  are  debts.  The  first  argument  of  Socinus, 
in  which  he  takes  for  granted  what  ought  to  have  been  proved.  A  trifling 
supposition  substituted  for  a  proof.  Whether  that  excellence,  by  virtue  of 
which  God  punishes  sins,  be  called  justice  in  the  Scriptures.  The  severity 
of  God,  what.  Our  opponent's  second  argument.  It  labours  under  the  same 
deficiency  as  the  first.  It  is  not  opposite  to  mercy  to  punish  the  guilty. 
There  is  a  distinction  between  acts  and  habits.  Our  opponent  confounds  tliem. 
The  mercy  of  God  infinite,  so  also  is  his  justice.  A  distinction  of  the  divine 
attributes.  In  pardoning  sins  through  Jesus  Christ,  God  hath  exercised  infinite 
justice  and  infinite  mercy.     The  conclusion  of  the  contest  with  Socinus  •  •  •  •   439 

CHAP.  XII. 

The  progress  of  the  dispute  to  the  theologians  of  our  own  country.  The  supreme 
authority  of  divine  truth.  Who  they  are,  and  what  kind  of  men,  who  have 
gone  into  factions  about  this  matter.  The  Coryphojus  of  the  adversaries,  Che 
very  illustrious  Twiss.  The  occasion  of  his  publishing  his  opinion.  The  opi- 
nion of  the  Arminians.  The  effects  of  the  death  of  Christ,  what.  Twiss  ac- 
knowledges punitory  justice  to  be  natural  to  God.  The  division  of  the  dispute 
with  Twiss.  Maccovius's  answers  to  the  arguments  of  Twiss.  The  plan  of 
our  disputation 451 

CHAP.  XIII. 

Twiss's  first  argument.  Its  answer.  A  trifling  view  of  the  divine  attributes. 
Whether  God  could,  by  his  absolute  power  forgive  sins  without  a  satisfaction  : 
to  let  sins  pass  unpunished,  implies  a  contradiction;  and  that  twofold.  What 
these  contradictions  are.  Whether  God  may  do,  what  man  may  do.  Whe- 
ther every  man  may  renounce  his  right.  Whether  God  cannot  forgive  sins 
because  of  his  justice.  The  second  argument.  Its  answer.  Distinctions  of 
necessity.  God  doth  no  work,  without  himself,  from  absolute  necessity.  Con- 
ditional necessity.  Natural  necessity  twofold.  God  doth  not  punish  to  the 
extent  of  his  power,  but  to  the  extent  of  his  justice.  God  always  acts  with  a 
concomitant  liberty.  An  argument  of  the  illustrious  Vossius  considered.  God 
a  consuming  fire,  but  an  intellectual  one.  An  exception  of  Twiss's.  Whe- 
ther independent  of  the  divine  appointment,  sin  would  merit  punishment.  In 
punishment,  what  things  are  to  be  considered.  The  relation  between  obe- 
dience as  to  reward,  and  disobedience  as  to  punishment  not  the  same.  The 
comparison  between  mercy  and  justice,  by  Vossius  improperly  instituted   •  •   454 

CHAP.  XIV. 

Twiss's  third  argument.  A  dispensation  with  regard  to  the  punishment  of  sin, 
what,  and  of  what  kind.  The  nature  of  punishment,  and  its  circumstances. 
The  instance  of  this  learned  opponent  refuted.  The  considerations  of  renew- 
ing and  punishing,  different.  How  long,  and  in  what  sense  God  can  dispense 
with  the  punishment  due  to  sin.  God  the  supreme  governor  of  the  Jewish 
polity :  also,  the  Lord  of  all.     The  fourth  argument  of  Twiss.     The  answer. 


yVn  CONTENTS, 

Page 
Whether  God  can  inflict  punishment  on  an  innocent  person.     In  what  sense 
God  is  more  willing  to  do  acts  of  ivindness  than  to  punish.     Wliat  kind   of 
willingness  that  assertion  respects.     The  conclusion  of  the  answer  to  Twiss's 
principal  arguments   461 

CHAP.   XV. 

The  defence  of  Sibrandus  Lubbertus  against  Twiss.  The  agreement  of  these 
very  learned  men  in  a  point  of  the  utmost  importance.  A  vindication  of  his 
argument  from  God's  hatred  against  sin.  Liberality  and  justice  different.  A 
sentiment  of  Lubbertus  undeservedly  charged  with  atheism.  What  kind  of 
necessity  of  operation  we  suppose  in  God  :  this  pointed  out.  The  sophisti- 
cal reasoning  of  this  learned  writer.  How  God  is  bound  to  manifest  any  pro- 
perty of  his  nature.  The  reasons  of  Lubbertus  and  Twiss's  objections  to  the 
same  considered.  That  passage  of  the  apostle,  Rom.  i.  32.  considered  and 
vindicated.  His  mode  of  disputing  rejected.  The  force  of  the  argument 
from  Rom.  i.  32.  The  righteous  judgment  of  God,  what.  Our  federal  re- 
presentative, and  those  represented  by  him,  are  one  mystical  body.  An  an- 
swer to  Twiss's  arguments  ;  Exod.  xxxiv.  7.  The  learned  writer's  answer 
respecting  that  passage.  A  defence  of  the  passage.  Punitory  justice  a  name 
of  God.  Whether  those  for  whom  Christ  hath  made  satisfaction,  ought  to  be 
called  guilty.  Psal.  v.  5 — 7.  the  sense  of  that  passage  considered.  From 
these  three  passages  the  argument  is  one  and  the  same.  Lubbertus's  argu- 
ment from  the  definition  of  justice,  weighed.  How  vindicatory  justice  is  dis- 
tinguished from  universal.  The  natures  of  liberality  and  justice  evidently 
different.  Punishment  belongs  to  God.  In  inflicting  punishment,  God 
vindicates  his  right.  Will  and  necessity,  whether  they  be  opposite.  The 
end  of  the  defence  of  Lubbertus    46.'> 

CHAP.  XVI. 

Piscator's  opinion  of  this  controversy.  How  far  we  assent  to  it.  Twiss's  argu- 
ments militate  against  it.  How  God  punishes  from  a  natural  necessity.  How 
God  is  a  consuming  fire.  God's  right,  of  what  kind.  Its  exercise  necessary, 
from  some  thing  supposed.  Whence  the  obligation  of  God  to  exercise  it 
arises.     Other  objections  of  Twiss  discussed    475 

CHAP.  XVII. 

Rutherford  reviewed.  An  oversight  of  that  learned  man.  His  opinion  of  pu- 
nitory justice.  He  contends  that  divine  justice  exists  in  God  freely.  The 
consideration  of  that  assertion.  This  learned  writer  and  Twiss  disagree.  His 
first  argument.  Its  answer.  The  appointment  of  Christ  to  death  twofold. 
The  appointment  of  Cbrist  to  the  mediatorial  office,  an  act  of  supreme  do- 
minion. The  punishment  of  Christ  an  act  of  punitory  justice.  An  argument 
of  that  learned  man,  easy  to  answer.  The  examination  of  the  same.  The 
learned  writer  proves  things  not  denied ;  passes  over  things  to  be  denied.  ' 
What  kind  of  necessity  we  ascribe  to  God  in  punishing  sins.  A  necessity 
upon  a  condition  supposed.  What  the  suppositions  are  upon  which  that 
necessity  is  founded.  A  difference  between  those  things  which  are  necessary 
by  a  decree,  and  those  which  are  so  from  the  divine  nature.  The  second  ar- 
gument of  that  learned  man.  His  obscure  manner  of  writing  pointed  out. 
Justice  and  mercy  different  in  respect  of  their  exercise.  What  it  is  to  owe  the 
good  of  punitory  justice  to  the  universe.  This  learned  man's  third  argument. 


CONTENTS.  ix 

Page 
The  answer.  Whether  God  could  forbid  sin,  and  not  under  the  penalty  of 
eternal  death.  Concerning  the  management  of  punishment  in  human  courts 
from  the  divine  appointment.  The  manner  of  U,  What  this  learned  author 
understands  by  the  interna!  courts  of  God.  This  learned  author's  fourth  ar- 
gunient.  All  acts  of  grace  have  a  respect  to  Christ.  His  fifth  argument. 
The  answer.  A  dissertation  on  the  various  degrees  of  punishment.  For 
what  reason  God  may  act  unequally  with  equals.  Concerning  the  delay  of 
punishment,  and  its  various  dispensations    481 

CHAP.  XVIII. 

The  conclusion  of  this  dissertation.  The  use  of  the  doctrine  herein  vindi- 
cated. God's  hatred  against  sin  revealed  in  various  ways.  The  dreadful 
effects  of  sin  all  over  the  creation.  Enmity  between  God  and  every  sin. 
Threalenings  and  the  punishment  of  sin  appointed.  The  description  of  sin 
in  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  To  what  great  miseries  we  are  liable  through  sin. 
The  excellency  of  grace,  in  pardoning  sin  through  Clirist.  Gratitude  and 
obedience  due  from  the  pardoned.  An  historical  fact  concerning  Tigranes, 
king  of  Armenia.  Christ  to  be  loved  for  his  cross  above  all  things.  The 
glory  of  God's  justice  revealed  by  this  doctrine  ;  and  also  of  his  wisdom  and 
holiness ■ 494 


VlNDlCIiE  EVANGELIC/E. 


CHAP.  XX. 

Of  the  priestly  office  of  Christ ;  hotv  he  was  a  priest ;  when  he  entered  on 
this  office  ;  and  hotv  he  dischargeth  it. 

MR.  BIDDLE'S  ELEVENTH  CHAPTER  EXAMINED. 
His  eleventh  cliapter  is  concerning  the  priestly  office  of  Jesus 
Christ.  In  the  first  and  second  question  he  grants  him  to 
be  a  priest,  from  Heb.  iv.  14.  and  to  be  appointed  to  that 
office  by  the  Father,  from  Heb.  v.  5.  The  remainder  of  the 
chapter  is  spent  in  sundry  attempts  to  prove  that  Christ 
was  not  a  priest,  whilst  he  was  on  the  earth ;  as  also  to  take 
off  from  the  end  of  his  priesthood,  with  the  benefit  redound- 
ing to  the  church  thereby. 

For  the  first,  a  man  wt)uld  suppose  Mr.  Biddle  were  fair 
and  ingenuous  in  his  concessions,  concerning  the  priesthood 
of  Jesus  Christ.  May  we  but  be  allowed  to  propose  a  few 
questions  to  him,  and  to  have  answers  suggested  according 
to  the  analogy  of  his  faith,  I  suppose  his  acknowledgment 
of  this  truth  will  be  found  to  come  exceedingly  short  of 
what  may  be  expected.  Let  him  therefore  shew,  whether 
Christ  be  a  high-priest  properly  so  called,  or  only  in  a 
metaphorical  sense,  with  respect  to  what  he  doth  in  heaven 
for  us,  as  the  high  priest  of  old  did  deal  for  the  people  in 
their  things,  when  he  received  mercy  from  God  ?  Again, 
whether  Christ  did  or  doth  offer  a  proper  sacrifice  to  God? 
and  if  so,  of  what  kind  ?  or  only  that  his  offering  of  himself 
in  heaven  is  metaphorically  so  called  ?  If  any  shall  say  that 
Mr.  B.  differs  from  his  masters  in  these  things,  I  must 
needs  profess  myself  to  be  otherwise  minded,  because  of  his 
following  attempt  to  exclude  him  from  the  investiture  with, 
and  execution  of,  his  priestly  office  in  this  life,  and  at  his 
death  ;  whence  it  inevitably  follows,  that  he  can  in  no  wise 
be  a  proper  priest,  nor  have  a  proper  sacrifice  to  offer, 
but  that  both  the  one  and  the  other  are  metaphorical ;  and 
so  termed  in  allusion  to  what  the  high-priest  among  the  Jews 

VOL.    IX.  B 


2  CHRIST  S    PRIESTLY    OFFICE. 

did  for  the  people.  That  which  I  have  to  speak  to,  in  this 
ensuing  discourse,  will  hinder  me  from  insisting  much  on  the 
demonstration  of  this,  that  Christ  was  a  priest  so  called,  and 
offered  to  God  a  sacrifice  of  atonement  or  propitiation,  pro- 
perly so  called,  whereof  all  other  priests  and  sacrifices  appoint- 
ed of  God, were  Luttypes.  Briefly,  therefore,  I  shall  do  it. 

The  Scripture  is  so  positive  that  Jesus  Christ  in  the  exe- 
cution of  his  office  of  his  mediation,  was,  and  is  a  priest, 
a  high-priest,  that  it  is  amongst  all  that  acknowledge  him 
utterly  out  of  question.  That  he  is  not  properly  so  called, 
but  metaphorically,  and  in  allusion  to  the  high-priest  of  the 
Jews,  as  was  said,  the  Socinians  contend.  I  shall  then,  as  I 
said,  in  the  first  place  prove,  that  Christ  was  a  high-priest, 
properly  so  called;  and  then  evince  when  he  was  so,  or 
when  he  entered  on  that  office.  This  first  is  evident  from 
that  description  or  definition  of  a  high-priest,  which  the 
apostle  gives,  Heb.  v.  1.  'Every  high-priest  taken  from 
among  men,  is  ordained  for  men,  that  he  may  offer  both 
gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sin,'  That  this  is  the  description 
of  a  high-priest  properly  so  called,  is  manifest  from  the 
apostle's  accommodation  of  this  office  spoken  of  to  Aaron, 
or  his  exemplifying  of  the  way  of  entrance  thereinto,  from 
that  of  Aaron,  v.  4.  '  And  no  man  taketh  this  honour  to  him- 
self, but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron.'  That  is, 
to  be  such  a  high-priest  as  Aaron  was,  which  here  he  de- 
scribes. One  that  had  that  honour,  which  Aaron  had.  Now 
certainly  Aaron  -was  a  high-priest  properly  and  truly,  if 
ever  any  one  was  so  in  the  world.  That  Jesus  Christ  was 
such  a  high-priest,  as  is  here  described,  yea,  that  he  is  the 
very  high-priest  so  described  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  appears 
upon  this  twofold  consideration.  1.  In  general,  the  apostle 
accommodates  this  definition  or  description  of  a  high- 
priest,  to  Jesus  Christ,  ver.  5.  '  So  also  Christ  glorified  not 
himself  to  be  made  a  high-priest.'  Were  it  not  that  very 
priesthood  of  which  he  treats,  that  Christ  was  so  called  to, 
it  were  easy  so  to  reply  :  true  ;  to  a  proper  priesthood  a 
man  must  be  called,  but  that  which  is  improper  and  meta- 
phorical only,  he  may  assume  to  himself,  or  obtain  it  upon 
a  more  general  account,  as  all  believers  do.  But  this  the 
apostle  excludes,  by  comparing  Christ  in  his  admission  to 
this  office,  with  Aaron,  who  was  properly  so.     2.  In  parti- 


CHRIST  S    PRIESTLY    OFFICE.  3 

cular,  all  the  parts  of  this  description  have  in  the  Scripture 
a  full  and  complete  accommodation  unto  Jesus  Christ,  so 
that  he  must  needs  be  properly  a  high-priest,  if  this  be  the 
description  of  such  a  one. 

1.  He  was  taken  from  amongst  men.  That  great  pro- 
phecy of  him  so  describes  him,  Deut.  xviii.  18.  'I  will  raise 
you  up  a  prophet  from  among  your  brethren.'  He  was  taken 
from  among  men,  or  raised  up  from  among  men,  or  raised 
up  from  among  his  brethren.  And  in  particular,  it  is  men- 
tioned out  of  what  tribe  amongst  them  he  was  taken,  Heb. 
vii.  13,  14.  '  For  he,  of  whom  these  things  are  spoken,  per- 
taineth  to  another  tribe :  For  it  is  evident,  that  our  Lord 
sprang  out  of  Juda.'  And  the  family  he  was  of  in  that  tribe, 
namely,  that  of  David,  is  everywhere  mentioned.  'God 
raised  up  the  horn  of  salvation  in  the  house  of  his  servant 
David  ;'  Luke  i.  69. 

2.  He  was  ordained  for  men,  ra  ir^og  tov  ^eov,  as  to 
things  appointed  by  God :  Ka^hraTui,  is  appointed  to  rule 
and  preside,  and  govern,  as  to  the  things  of  God.  This  or- 
dination or  appointment,  is  that  after-mentioned,  which  he 
had  of  God  :  his  ordination  to  this  office,  ver.  5,  6.  *  So  also 
Christ  glorified  not  himself,  to  be  made  a  high-priest,  but 
he  that  said  unto  him.  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I 
begotten  thee,'  &c.  He  had  his  ordination  from  God. 
He  who  made  him  both  Lord  and  Christ,  made  him  also  a 
high-priest ;  and  he  was  made  in  a  more  solemn  manner 
than  ever  any  priest  was,  even  by  an  oath  ;  chap.  vii.  20,  21. 
'  For  as  much  as  not  without  an  oath,'  &:c.  and  he  was  so 
appointed  for  men,  to  preside  and  govern  them  in  things  ap- 
pertaining to  God,  as  it  was  with  the  high  priest  of  old ; 
the  whole  charge  of  the  house  of  God,  as  to  holy  things,  his 
worship,  and  his  service,  was  committed  to  him.  So  is  it 
with  Jesus  Christ,  Heb.  iii.  6.  '  Christ  is  as  a  Son  over  his 
own  house,  whose  house  are  we.'  He  is  for  us,  and  over  us, 
in  the  things  of  the  worship,  and  house  of  God.  And  that 
he  was  ordained  for  men,  the  Holy  Ghost  assures  us  farther, 
chap.  vii.  26.  '  Such  a  high-priest  became  us  ;'  he  was  so, 
for  us  :  which  is  the  first  part  of  the  description  of  a  high 
priest,  properly  so  called. 

3.  The  prime  and  peculiar  end  of  this  office,  is   to  offer 
gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sin.    And  as  we  shall  abundantly  ma- 


4  CHRIST S    PRIESTLY    OFFICE. 

nifest  afterward,  that  Christ  did  thus  offer  gifts  and  sacri- 
fices for  sin :  so  the  apostle  professedly  affirms,  that  it  was 
necessary  he  should  do  so,  because  he  was  a  high-priest, 
chap  .viii.  3.  '  For  every  high-priest  is  ordained  to  offer  gifts 
and  sacrifices ;  wherefore  it  is  of  necessity,  that  this  man 
have  somewhat  also  to  offer.'  The  force  of  the  apostle's  ar- 
gument, concerning  the  necessity  of  the  offering  of  Christ, 
lies  thus.  Every  high-priest  is  to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices  ; 
but  Christ  is  a  high-priest,  therefore  he  must  have  some- 
what to  offer.  Now  if  Christ  was  not  a  priest  properly  so 
called,  it  is  evident  his  argument  would  be  inconclusive;  for 
from  that  which  is  properly  so,  to  that  which  is  only  so  me- 
taphorically, and  as  to  some  likeness  and  proportion,  no  ar- 
gument will  lie.  For  instance  ;  Every  true  man  is  a  rational 
creature  ;  but  he  that  shall  thence  conclude,  that  a  painted 
man  is  so,  will  find  his  conclusion  very  feeble.  What  it  is 
that  Christ  had  to  offer,  and  what  sacrifice  he  offered,  shall 
afterward  be  declared.  The  definition  then  of  a  high-priest, 
properly  so  called,  in  all  the  parts  of  it,  belonging  unto  Christ, 
it  is  necessary  that  the  thing  defined  belong  also  unto  him. 

2.  He  who  is  a  priest,  according  to  the  order  of  a  true 
and  real  priesthood,  he  is  a  true  and  real  priest.  Believers 
are  called  priests.  Rev.  i.  5.  and  are  said  to  offer  up  sacri- 
fices to  God  f  spiritual  sacrifices,  such  as  God  is  pleased 
with.  Whence  is  it,  that  they  are  not  real  and  proper 
priests  ?  Because  they  are  not  priests  of  any  real  order  of 
priesthood,  but  are  so  called,  because  of  some  allusion  to, 
and  resemblance  of,  the  ''priests  of  old,  in  their  access  unto 
God.  This  will  also  by  the  way  discover  the  vanity  of  them 
among  us,  who  would  have  the  ministers  of  the  gospel,  in 
contradistinction  to  other  believers,  be  called  priests.  Of 
what  order  were  they  who  did  appropriate  that  appellation? 
The  absurdity  of  this  figment,  the  learned  Hooker  could  no 
otherwise  defend,  than  by  affirming  that  priest  was  an  ab- 
breviation of  presbyter.  When  both  in  truth,  and  in  the 
intendment  of  them  that  used  that  term,  its  sense  was  other- 
wise. But  to  return.  The  sons  of  Aaron  were  properly 
priests.  Why- so?  Because  they  were  so  appointed  in  the  line 
of  the  priesthood  of  Levi,  according  to  the  order  of  Aaron. 
Hence  I   assume,  Christ  being  called  a  priest,  according  to 

a  Heb.  xiii.  16.  ^  1  Pet.  ii.  9-     Eplies.  ii.  18.     Hcb.x.  22. 


CHRISTS    PRIESTLY    OFFICE.  O 

the  order  of  a  true  and  proper  priesthood,  was  truly,  and 
properly  so.  *  He  was  a  priest  after  the  order  of  Melchi- 
sedec;'  Psal.  ex.  4.  which  the  apostle  often  insists  on  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  If  you  say  that  Christ  is  called  a 
high-priest,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  not  properly,  but 
by  reason  of  some  proportion  and  analogy,  or  by  way  of  al- 
lusion to  him  :  you  may  as  well  say,  that  he  was  a  priest  ac- 
cording to  the  order  of  Aaron  ;  there  being  a  great  simili- 
tude between  them,  against  which  the  apostle  expressly  dis- 
putes in  the  whole  of  the  7th  chapter  to  the  Hebrews.  He 
therefore  was  a  real  priest,  according  to  a  real  and  proper 
order. 

3.  Again,  He  that  was  appointed  of  God  to  offer  sacri- 
fices for  the  sins  of  men,  was  a  priest  properly  so  called  ;  but 
that  Christ  did  so,  and  was  so  appointed,  will  appear  in  our 
farther  consideration  of  the  time,  when  he  was  a  priest,  as  also 
in  that  following,  of  the  sacrifice  he  offered ;  so  that  at  pre 
sent  I  shall  not  need  to  insist  upon  it. 

4.  Let  it  be  considered,  that  the  great  medium  of  the 
apostolical  persuasion  against  apostacy  in  that  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  consists  in  the  exalting  of  the  priesthood  of  Christ, 
above  that  of  Aaron  :  now  that  which  is  metaphorically  only 
so  in  any  kind,  is  clearly  and  evidently  less  so,  than  that 
which  is  properly  and  directly  so.  If  Christ  be  metaphori- 
cally only  a  priest,  he  is  less  than  Aaron  on  that  considera- 
tion. He  may  be  far  more  excellent  than  Aaron  in  other 
respects,  yet  in  respect  of  the  priesthood  he  is  less  excellent, 
which  is  so  directly  opposite  to  the  design  of  the  apostle  in 
that  epistle,  as  nothing  can  be  more.  It  is  then  evident  on 
all  these  considerations,  and  might  be  made  farther  conspi- 
cuous, by  such  as  are  in  readiness  to  be  added,  that  Christ 
was,  and  is,  truly  and  properly  a  high-priest,  which  was  the 
first  thing  designed  for  confirmation. 

The  Racovian  catechism  doth  not  directly  ask  or  answer 
this  question.  Whether  Christ  be  a  high-priest  properly  so 
called?  but  yet  insinuates  its  author's  judgment  expressly  to 
the  contrary.  *^'The  sacerdotal  office  of  Christ  is  placed 
herein,  that  as  by  his  kingly  office  he  can  help  and  relieve 

«  Munus  icitur  sacerdotale  in  eo  situm  est,  quod  quemadmodum  pro  regio  mu- 
nere  potest  nobis  in  omnibus  nostris  necessitatibus  subveniie:  ita  pro  niunere  sacer- 
dotali  subvenire  vult,  ac  porro  subvenit :  atque  lisc  illius  subveniendi,  seu  opis  atfe- 
rendae  ratio,  sacrificiuni  ejus  appellatur.  Catec.  Rac.  de  Mun.  Clir.  Sacer.  Q.  1. 


6  Christ's  puiEbTLY  office. 

our  necessities  ;  so  by  his  sacerdotal  office  he  will  help,  and 
actually  doth  so  :  and  this  way  of  his  helping  or  relieving 
us,  is  called  his  sacrifice.' 

Thus  they  begin.  But,  1 .  That  any  office  of  Christ  should 
bespeak  power  to  relieve  us,  without  a  will,  as  is  here  affirmed 
of  his  kingly,  is  a  proud,  foolish,  and  ignorant  fancy.   Is  this 
enouoh  for  a  king  among  men,  that  he  be  able  to  relieve  his 
subjects,  though  he  be  not  willing  ?  or  is  not  this  a  proper 
description  of  a  wicked  tyrant  ?   Christ  as  a  king,  is  as  well 
willing,  as  able  to  save  ;  Isa.  xxxii.  1,  2.    2.  Christ  as  a  high- 
priest  is    no  less  able  than  willing  also,  and  as  a  king,  he  is 
no  less  willing  than  able  ;   Heb.  vii.  27.     That  is,  as  a  king 
he  is  both  able  and  willing  to  save  us,  as  to  the  application 
of  salvation,  and  the  means  thereof.     As  a  priest,  he  is  both 
willing  and  able  to  save  us,  as  to  the  procuring  of  salvation, 
and  all  the  means  thereof.     3.  It  is  a  senseless  folly  to  ima- 
gine, that  the  sacrifice   of  Christ  consists  in  the  manner  of 
affording  us  that  help  and  relief,  which  as  a  king  he  is  able 
to  give  us :    such  weak  engines  do  these  men  apply,  for 
the  subversion  of  the  cross  of  Christ;  but  of  this  more  af- 
terward. 

But  they  proceed  to  give  us  their  whole  sense,  in  the  next 
question  and  answer,  which  are  as  followeth. 

*Q.  "^Why  is  this  way  of  his  affording  help,  called  a  sa- 
crifice ? 

*  A.  It  is  called  so  by  a  figurative  manner  of  speaking  ;  for 
as  in  the  old  covenant,  the  high-priest  entering  into  the  ho- 
liest of  holies,  did  do  those  things,  which  pertained  to  the 
expiation  of  the  sins  of  the  people  ;  so  Christ  hath  now  en- 
tered the  heavens,  that  there  he  might  appear  before  God 
for  us,  and  perform  all  things  that  belong  to  the  expiation  of 
our  sins.' 

The  sum  of  what  is  here  insinuated,  is,  1.  That  the  sacri- 
fice of  Christ  is  but  a  figurative  sacrifice,  and  so  consequently, 
that  he  himself  is  a  figurative  priest :  for  as  the  priest  is, 
such  is  his  sacrifice  :  proper,  if  proper;  metaphorical,  if  rae- 

<i  Quare  lisec  ejus  opis  afferenda;  ratio  sacrificiura  vocatiir? — Vocatur  ita  figurato 
loquendi  modo,  quod  qucmadmodum  in  prisco  foedere  sunimus  Pontifex  ingressusin 
sanctum  sanctorum,  ea  quce  ad  expianda  peccata  populi  spectarent,  perficiebat:  ita 
Cliristus  nunc  penetravit  coelos,  ut  illic  Deo  appareat  pro  nobis,  et  omnia  ad  cxpia- 
tionem  peccatorum  nostrorum  spcctantia  peragat.  Heb.  ii.  17.  iv.  14.  v.  1.  ix.  24. 
De  Mun.  Chr.  Sacerdot.  Q.  2. 


CHRIST  S    PRIESTLY    OFFICE.  7 

taphorical.  What  say  our  catechists  for  the  proof  hereof? 
They  have  said  it;  not  one  word  of  reason,  or  any  one  testi- 
mony of  Scripture  is  produced  to  give  countenance  to  this 
figment.  2.  That  the  high  priest  made  atonement  and  ex- 
piation of  sins,  only  by  his  entering  into  the  most  holy  place, 
and  vi'hat  he  did  there  :  which  is  notoriously  false,  and  con- 
trary to  very  many  express  testimonies  of  Scripture ;  Lev. 
iv.  3.  13.  21.27.  V.  16.  vi.  5—7.  xvi.  &c.  3.  That  Christ 
was  not  a  high-priest,  until  he  entered  the  holy  place ;  of 
which  afterward.  4.  That  he  made  not  expiation  of  our 
sins,  until  he  entered  heaven,  and  appeared  in  the  presence 
of  God.  Of  the  truth  whereof,  let  the  reader  consult  Heb. 
i.  3.  If  Christ  be  a  figurative  priest,  I  see  no  reason  why  he 
is  not  a  figurative  king  also ;  and  such  indeed  those  men 
seem  to  make  him. 

The  second  thing  proposed  is,  that  Christ  was  a  high- 
priest,  whilst  he  was  on  the  earth  ;  and  offered  a  sacrifice  to 
God.  I  shall  here  first  answer  what  was  objected  by  Mr. 
Biddle  to  the  contrary,  and  then  confirm  the  truth  itself. 

I  say  then,  first,  that  Christ  was  a  priest,  while  he  was  on 
earth,  and  he  continueth  to  be  so  for  ever  ;  that  is,  until  the 
whole  work  of  mediation  be  accomplished. 

Socinus  first  published  his  opinion  in  this  business  in  his 
book  *  De  Jesu  Christo  Servatore'  against  Covet.  For  some 
time  the  venom  of  that  error  was  not  taken  notice  of.  Six  years 
after,  as  himself  telleth  us,  (''Epistola  ad  Niemojev.  1.)  he 
wrote  his  answer  to  Volanus,  wherein  he  confirmed  it  again 
at  large.  Whereupon  Niemojevius,  a  man  of  his  own  anti- 
trinitarian  infidelity,  writes  to  him,  and  ""asks  him  sharply  (in 
substance),  if  he  was  not  mad  to  affirm,  a  thing  so  contrary 
to  express  texts  of  Scripture.  (Epist.  Joh.  Niemojev.  1.  ad 
Faust.  Socin.)  Before  him,  that  atheistical  monk,  Ochinus, 
had  dropped  some  few  things  in  his  dialogues  hereabout. 
Before  him  also,  Abailardus  had  made  an  entrance  into  the 
same  abomination,  of  whom,  says  ^Bernard,  (Epistohi  190.) 
'Habemus  in  Francia  novum  de  doctoremagistro  theologum: 

«  Nam  annos  abljiuc  sex  atqiie  eo  amplius  idem  paiadoxum  in  raea  de  Jesu  Cliristo 
Servatore  disputatione  sine  dubio  legisti.  Faust.  Socin.  Res.  ad  Joh.  Niemojev.  Ep.  1. 

f  Veruni  non  sine  mxrore  (ne  quid  gravius  addani),incidi  inter  legenduni  in  quod- 
dam  parado.xon,  dum  Christum  in  morte,  sive  incrucesacrificium  obtulisse  peniegas, 
Joh.  Niemojev.  Epist,  1.  ad  Faust.  Socin. 

«  Vide  Bernard.  Epist.  109. 


o  CHRIST  8    PRIESTLY    OFFICE. 

qui  ab  ineunte  setate  sua  in  arte  dialectica  lusit,  et  nunc  in 
Scripturis  sacris  insani.' 

How  the  whole  nation  of  the  Socinians  have  since  con- 
sented into  this  notion  of  their  master,  I  need  not  manifest. 
It  is  grown  one  of  the  articles  of  their  creed ;  as  this  man 
here  lays  it  down  among  the  substantial  grounds  of  Christian 
religion.  Confessedly  on  their  part,  the  whole  doctrine  of  the 
satisfaction  of  Christ,  and  justification,  turns  on  this  hinge. 
For  though  we  have  other  innumerable  demonstrations  of  the 
truth  we  assert,  yet  as  to  them,  if  this  be  proved,  no  more  is 
needful.  For  if  Christ  was  a  priest,  and  offered  himself  a 
sacrifice,  it  cannot  but  be  a  sacrifice  of  atonement,  seeing  it 
was  by  blood  and  death.  Crellius  tells  us,  that  Christ  died 
for  us  on  a  double  account;  partly  as  the  ''mediator,  and 
surety  of  the  new  covenant;  partly  as  a  priest,  that  was  to 
offer  himself  to  God.  A  man  might  think  he  granted  Christ 
to  have  been  a  priest  on  the  earth,  and  as  such  to  have  of- 
fered himself  a  sacrifice.  So  also  doth  'Volkelius  allow  the 
killing  of  the  sacrifice,  to  represent  the  death  of  Christ. 
Now  the  killing  of  the  sacrifice,  was  the  sacrificing  of  it. 
So  Stuckius  proves  from  that  of  the  poet,  '  Et  nigram  mac- 
tabis  ovem,  lucumque  revises.'  But  Crellius  afterward  ex- 
pounds himself,  and  tells  us,  ^that  this  twofold  office  of 
Christ  (than  which  nothing  can  be  spoken  more  ridicu- 
lously) of  a  mediator  and  a  priest  did  as  it  were  meet  in  the 
death  of  Christ :  the  one  ending  (that  is,  his  being  a  medi- 
ator), and  the  other  beginning.  And  'Volkelius  doth  the 
like  ;  with  a  sufficient  contradiction  to  his  assertion,  calling 
the  death  of  Christ  the  beginning  and  entrance  of  his  priest- 
hood. For  his  mediatorship,  Crellius  telleth  us  that  it  is 
most  evident,  that  Christ  therein  was  subordinate  to  God  : 

•"  Etenim  mortem,  Chrlstus  subiit,  duplici  ratione;  partim  quidem,  ut  foederis  me- 
diator, seu  sponsor,  et  veluti  testator  quidem  partim  utSacerdos  Deo  ipsum  obiaturus. 
Crell.  de  caus.  m.ort.  Christi,  p.  6. 

"  Partes  Iiujus  muneris  liaec  sunt  potissimum;  mactatio  victiraaj,  in  tabernaculum 
ad  oblationem  peragendam  ingressio,  et  ex  eodem  egressio.  Ac  mactatio  quidem 
mortem  Christi  violentam,  sanguinisque  profusionem  continet.  Volkel.  de  vera  Re- 
lig.  lib.  3.  cap.  37.  p.  145. 

•'  In  morte  utrumque  munus  (mediatoris,  et  sacerdotis)  veluti  coit :  et  prius  qui- 
dem in  ea  desinit,  eaque  confirmatur  postremumautem  incipit,  et  ad  id  Christusfuit 
quodammodo  praeparatus,  p.  8. 

•  Hinc  colligitur  solani  Christi  mortem,  nequaquam  illam  perfectam  absolutaraque 
ipsius  oblationem  de  qua  in  Epist.  ad  Hebraeos  agitur,  fuisse — sed  piincipium  et  prae- 
parationem  quandam  istius  sacerdotii  in  coelo  demum  administrandi,  extitisse.  Idem. 
ibid. 


CHRIST  S    PllIE.STLY     OFFICE.  9 

SO  he  phrases  it ;  that  is,  he  was  a  mediator  with  us  from 
God,  and  not  at  all  '"with  God  for  iis.  And  this  he  proves, 
because  he  "put  not  himself  into  this  office,  nor  was  put 
into  it  by  us,  so  to  confirm  the  covenant  between  God  and 
us ;  but  was  a  minister  and  messenger  of  God,  who  sent  him 
for  this  purpose.  But  the  folly  of  this  shall  be  afterward 
manifested.  Christ  was  given  of  God,  by  his  own  consent, 
to  be  a  mediator  for  us,  and  to  lay  down  his  life  a  ransom  for 
us  ;  1  Tim.  ii.  4 — 6.  which  certainly  he  did  to  God  for  us, 
and  not  for  God  to  us,  as  shall  afterward  be  evinced.  But 
coming  to  speak  of  his  priesthood  he  is  ataloss.  "'When,' 
saith  he,  'he  is  considered  as  a  priest  (for  that  he  was  pro- 
perly a  priest  he  denies,  calling  it '  Sacerdotii,  et  oblationis 
metaphora')  although  he  seemeth  to  be  like  one  who  doth 
something  with  God  in  the  name  of  men,  if  we  consider  di- 
ligently, we  shall  find  that  he  is  such  a  priest,  as  performs 
something  with  us,  in  the  name  of  God.' 

This  proof  is,  TTOjoa  rrjv  avv^eaiv  koi  dia'ipeaiv.  But  this 
is  no  new  thing  with  these  men.  Because  Christ  as  a  high- 
priest,  doth  something  with  us  for  God,  therefore  he  did  no- 
thing with  God  for  us.  As  though  because  the  high-priest 
of  old,  was  over  the  house  of  God,  and  ruled  therein,  there- 
fore he  did  not  offer  sacrifices  to  God  for  the  sins  of  the 
people.  All  that  Crellius,  in  his  ensuing  discourse  hath  to 
prove  this  by,  is,  because  as  he  saith,  '  Christ  offered  not  his 
sacrifice  until  he  came  to  heaven.'  Which  because  he  proves 
not,  nor  endeavours  to  do  it,  we  may  see  what  are  the  texts 
of  Scripture  urged  for  the  confirmation  of  that  conceit  by 
Mr.  B.  and  others. 

Seeing  all  the  proofs  collected  for  this  purpose  are  out  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  I  shall  consider  them  in  order  as 
they  lie  in  the  epistle,  and  not  as  transposed  by  his  questions 
with  whom  1  have  to  do. 

The  first  is,  in  his  eleventh  question,  thus  insinuated ; 
'  Why  would  God  have  Christ  come  to  his  priestly  office  by 

n>  Jam  vero  satis  apparet,  Christum  priori  modo  spectatum,  penitus  Deo  subordi- 

natum  esse,  p.  6.  , .       •  .    j  r   j      •  .      r» 

n  Neque  enim  vel  ipsum  ingessit,  vel  a  nobis  missus  est  ad  toedus  inter  Deum,  et 
nos  peragendiiiii :  sed  Dei,  qui  ipsum  in  huiic  fmem  niiserat,  minister,  ac  iiiternuntius 
liac  in  parte  fuit,  p.  7.  .......  t    .     ■  •  ix        i- 

°  Cum  vero  considcratur  ut  Sacerdos,  etsi  simiiitudiiiem  tefert  ejus,  qui  Deo  all- 
quid  hoininum  nomine  prastet.    Si  tanien  rem  ipsaui  penitus  spectes,  deprehendes, 
talem  eura  esse  saccrdotem,  qui  Dei  nomine  nobis  aliquod  prxstef,  p.  7. 
VOL.  IX.  C 


10"  Christ's  priestly   office. 

suffering  V  According  to  the  tenor  of  the  doctrine  before 
delivered,  the  inference  is,  that  until  after  his  sufferings  he 
obtained  not  his  priestly  office,  for  by  them  he  entered  upon 
it.     The  answer  is,'  Heio.  ii.  10.  17,  18.' 

Arts.  1.  The  apostle  doth  not  say  absolutely,  that  it  be- 
came Christ  to  be  made  like  us,  that  he  mioht  be  a  hiffh- 
priest,  but  that  he  might  be  a  merciful  high-priest.  That  is, 
his  suffering  and  death  were  not  required  antecedently,  that 
he  might  be  a  priest,  but  they  were  required  to  the  execution 
of  that  end  of  his  priesthood,  which  consists  in  sympathy 
and  sufferance  together  with  them,  in  whose  stead  he  was  a 
priest.  He  sustained  all  his  afflictions,  and  death  itself,  not 
that  he  might  be  a  priest,  but  that  being  merciful,  and  hav- 
ing experience,  he  might  on  that  account  be  ready  to  succour 
them  that  are  tempted ;  and  this  the  words  of  the  last  verse 
do  evidently  evince  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Ghost ; 
*  in  that  he  suffered,  being  tempted.'  His  sufferings  were  to 
this  end  of  his  priesthood,  that  he  should  be  merciful,  able 
to  succour  them  that  are  tempted  ;  besides,  it  is  plainly  said, 
that  he  was  a  high-priest,  slg  t6  iXa(7Ki.<y9ai  rag  anapriag  tov 
Xaoii,  or  iXaaKecrdai  rbv  ^eov  rrepl  twv  f!,uopriwv,  to  make  re- 
conciliation for  the  sins  of  the  people.  Now  that  reconcilia- 
tion was  made  by  his  death  and  blood  the  Scripture  informs 
us,  Rom.  V.  10.  'Whilst  we  were  enemies,  we  were  recon- 
ciled by  the  death  of  his  Son ;'  Dan.  ix.  24.  So  that  even 
from  this  place  of  Scripture,  produced  to  the  contrary,  it  is 
evident,  that  Christ  'was  a  high-priest  on  earth,'  because  he 
was  so  when  he  made  reconciliation,  which  he  did  in  his 
death  on  the  cross. 

But  yet  Mr.  Biddle's  candid  procedure  in  this  business 
may  be  remarked ;  with  his  huckstering  the  word  of  God. 
He  reads  the  words  in  this  order :  '  It  became  him  to  make 
the  captain  of  their  salvation  perfect  through  suffering;  that 
he  might  be  a  merciful  and  faithful  high-priest.'  Who  would 
not  conclude,  that  this  is  the  series  and  tenor  of  the  apostle's 
discourse ;  and  that  Christ  is  said  to  be  made  perfect 
through  sufferings,  that  he  might  be  a  merciful  high-priest? 
These  words  of '  making  perfect  through  suffering,'  are  part 
of  the  10th  verse;  'that  he  might  be  a  merciful  high-priest,' 
part  of  the  17th.  Between  which  two  there  intercedes  a  dis- 
course of  a  business  quite  of  another  nature;  namely,  his 


CHRIST  S     PRIES'l'l.Y     OtFlCE.  11 

being  'made  like  his  brethren'  in  taking  on  'him  the  seed  of 
Abraham,'  whereof  these  words,  *  that  he  might  be  a  merci- 
ful and  faithful  high-priest,'  are  the  immediate  issue ;  that 
is,  he  had  a  body  prepared  him,  that  he  might  be  a  priest, 
and  have  a  sacrifice.  Our  High  Priest  was  exercised  with 
sufferings  and  temptations,  says  the  apostle  :  Jesus  was  ex- 
ercised with  sufferings  and  temptations,  that  he  might  be 
our  high-priest,  says  Mr.  Biddle. 

Heb.  viii.  1,  2.  is  insisted  on  to  the  same  purpose  in  his 
third  question,  which  is,  'What  manner  of  high-priest  is 
Christ?' 

*  A.  Heb.  viii.  1,  2.  We  have  such  a  high-priest,  who 
is  set  on  the  right  hand  of  the  throne  of  the  majesty  in  the 
heavens.  A  minister  of  the  sanctuary,  and  of  the  true  taber- 
nacle,' &c.  I  name  this  in  the  next  place,  because  it  is  co- 
incident with  that  of  chap.  iv.  14.  insisted  on  by  Socinus, 
though  omitted  by  our  author. 

Hence  it  is  inferred,  that  Christ  entered  the  heavens 
before  he  was  a  high-priest;  and  is  a  high-priest  only 
when  he  is  set  'down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on 
high.' 

Ans.  That  Christ  is  a  high-priest  there  also,  we  grant ;  that 
he  is  so  there  only,  there  is  not  one  word  in  the  place  cited 
to  prove.  Heb.  iv.  14.  saith  indeed,  that '  our  High  Priest  is 
entered  into  the  heavens ;'  but  it  says  not,  that  he  was  not 
our  high-priest  before  he  did  so  ;  as  the  high-priest  of  the 
Jews  entered  into  the  holy  place ;  but  yet  he  was  a  high- 
priest  before,  or  he  could  not  have  entered  into  it.  He  is 
such  a  high-priest,  *  who  is  set  on  the  right  hand  of  the 
throne  of  majesty;'  that  is,  not  like  the  typical  high-priest 
who  died,  and  was  no  more;  but  he  abides  in  his  office  of 
priesthood  ;  not  to  offer  sacrifice,  for  that  he  did  once  for  all, 
but  to  intercede  for  us  for  ever. 

Heb.  viii.  4.  is  nextly  produced  in  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion. 

'  Was  not  Christ  a  priest  whilst  he  was  upon  earth ; 
namely,  when  he  died  on  the  cross  ? 

'  A.  Heb.  viii.  4.  vii.  15,  16. 

The  same  question  and  answer  is  given  by  the  Racovian 
catechism,  and  this  is  the  main  place  insisted  on  by  all  the 
Socinians :  '  For  if  he  were  on  earth,  he  should  not  be  a 

c  2 


12  Christ's  priestly  office. 

priest,  seeing  that  there  are  priests,  that  offer  gifts  according 
to  the  law.' 

Ans.  1.  'Etti  yriQ  may  be  interpreted  of  the  state  and 
condition  of  him  spoken  of,  and  not  of  the  place  wherein  he 
was.  If  he  were  etti  jrig  of  a  mere  earthly  condition,  as  the 
high-priest  of  the  Jews,  he  should  not  be  a  priest.  So  is  the 
expression  used  elsewhere.  Col.  iii.  2.  we  are  commanded 
not  to  mind  to.  Iiri  rrig  jrig ;  that  is  '  terrene'  things,  earthly 
things.  And,  ver.  5.  'mortify  your  members,' ra  tTrt  rfjc  yrw, 
that  is,  your  earthly  members. 

2.  If  the  word  signify  the  place,  and  not  the  condition  of 
the  things,  whereof  they  are,  they  may  be  referred  to  the  ta- 
bernacle, of  which  he  speaks,  and  not  to  the  high-priest :  ver. 
2.  the  apostle  tells  us,  that  he  is  the  minister,  or  priest  of 
the  true  tabernacle,  which  God  made,  and  not  man:  and 
then,  ver.  3.  that  in  the  other  tabernacle  there  were  *  priests 
that  offered  daily  sacrifices;'  so  that,  saith  he,  if  this  taber- 
nacle 7fv  tTTi  yng,  he  should  not  be  a  priest  of  it.  For  in  the 
the  earthly  tabernacle  there  were  other  administrators  ;  but 
to  pass  these  interpretations, 

3.  The  apostle  does  not  say,  that  he  that  is  upon  the 
earth  can  be  no  priest,  which  must  be  our  adversaries'  argu- 
ment, if  any,  from  this  place,  and  thus  formed.  He  that  is 
upon  the  earth  is  no  priest ;  Christ  before  his  ascension  was 
upon  the  earth,  therefore  he  was  no  priest.  This  is  not  the 
intendment  of  the  apostle,  for  in  the  same  verse  he  affirms,, 
that  there  were  priests  on  the  earth.  This,  then,  is  the  ut- 
most of  his  intendment;  that  if  Christ  had  been  only  to  con- 
tinue on  the  earth,  and  to  have  done  what  priests  did,  or 
were  to  do  upon  the  earth,  there  was  neither  need  of  him, 
nor  room  for  him :  but  now  is  he  a  priest,  seeing  he  was  not 
to  take  upon  him  their  work  ;  but  had  an  eternal  priesthood 
of  his  own  to  administer.  There  is  no  more  in  this  place, 
than  there  is,  chap.vii.  19.  23,24.  which  is  a  clear  assertion, 
that  Christ  had  a  priesthood  of  his  own,  which  was  to  per- 
fect and  complete  all  things;  being  not  to  share  with  the 
priests,  that  had  all  their  work  to  do  upon  the  earth.  And  in 
ver.  13 — 15.  of  chap.  7.  you  have  a  full  exposition  of  the 
whole  matter.  The  sum  is,  Christ  was  none  of  the  priests  of 
the  Old  Testament ;  no  priest  of  the  law  :  all  their  earthly 
things  vanished,  when  he  undertook  the  administration  of 


Christ's  priestly   office.  13 

heavenly.  So  that  neither  doth  this  at  all  evince,  that  Christ 
was  not  a  priest  of  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  even  before 
his  ascension. 

To  this,  Heb.  vii.  15, 16.  is  urged,  and  those  words,  'After 
the  power  of  an  endless  life,'  are  insisted  on :  as  though  Christ 
was  not  a  priest,  until  after  he  had  ended  his  life,  and  risen 
again. 

But  is  this  the  intendment  of  the  apostle?  Doth  he  aim 
at  any  such  thing  ?  The  apostle  is  insisting  on  one  of  his  ar- 
guments to  prove  from  the  institution  of  the  priesthood  of 
Melchisedec,  or  a  priesthood  after  his  order,  the  excellency 
of  the  priesthood  of  Christ  above  that  of  Aaron;  from  the 
manner  of  the  institution  of  the  one  and  of  the  other,  this  ar- 
gument lies :  says  he,  'The  priests  of  the  Jews  were  made  Kara 
vo/xov  IvToXrig  aapKiKrig,  according  to  the  law  of  a  carnal  com- 
mandment:'  that  is,  by  carnal  rights  and  ceremonies;  by 
carnal  oil  and  ordinances;  'but  this  man  is  made  a  priest 
after  the  order  of  Melchisedec,  icara  dvvafxiv  Korig  dKUTaXvTov, 
by  virtue  of  an  endless  life;  by  the  appointment  of  God, 
having  such  a  life,  as  should  never  by  death  interrupt  him  in 
the  administration  of  his  office  ;  for  though  the  life  of  Christ 
was  intercepted  three  days,  yet  his  person  was  never  dis- 
solved, as  to  the  administration  of  his  office  of  priesthood  : 
which  is  the  thing  spoken  of,  and  in  respect  of  that  he  had 
an  endless  life. 

Quest.  9.  is  to  the  same  purpose.  '  How  did  Christ  enter 
into  the  holy  place  to  offer  himself? 

'A.  By  his  own  blood  ;'  Heb.  ix.  12. 

Ans.  Would  not  any  one  imagine,  that  it  was  said  in  the 
Scripture,  that  Christ  entered  into  the  holy  place  to  offer 
himself;  that  that  is  taken  for  granted,  and  the  modus,  or 
manner  how  he  did  it,  is  alone  inquired  after?  This  is  but 
one  part  of  the  sophistry  Mr.  B.  makes  use  of  in  this  Scrip- 
ture catechism.  But  it  is  so  far  from  being  a  true  report  of 
the  testimony  of  the  Scripture,  that  the  plain  contrary  is  as- 
serted; namely,.that  Christ  offered  himself  before  his  entrance 
into  the  holy  place,  not  made  with  hands,  and  then  entered 
thereinto,  to  appear  in  the  presence  of  God  for  us.  Christ 
entered  by  his  own  blood  into  the  holy  place,  inasmuch  as 
bavins'  shed  and  offered  his  blood  a  sacrifice  to  God,  with 
the  efficacy  of  it  he  entered  into  his  presence,  to  carry  on 


14  Christ's  priestly  offtce. 

the  work  of  his  priesthood  in  his  intercession  for  us.  As  the 
high-priest,  having  offered  without  a  sacrifice  to  God,  entered 
with  the  blood  of  it  into  the  most  holy  place,  there  to  perfect 
and  complete  the  duties  of  his  office,  in  offering  and  inter- 
ceding for  the  people. 

The  remaining  questions  of  this  chapter  may  be  speedily 
despatched.     His  sixth  is, 

'What  benefit  happeneth  by  Christ's  priesthood? 
'A.  Heb.  V.  9,  10/ 

Though  the  place  be  very  improperly  urged,  as  to  an  an- 
swer to  the  question  proposed ;  there  being  very  many  more 
testimonies  clearly  and  distinctly  expressing  the  immediate 
fruits  and  benefits  of  the  priestly  office  of  Christ;  yet  be- 
cause we  grant,  that  by  his  priesthood  principally  and  emi- 
nently, Christ  is  become  the  author  of  salvation,  we  shall 
not  dissent,  as  to  this  question  and  answer.  Only  we  add 
as  to  the  manner,  that  the  way  whereby  Christ  by  his  priest- 
hood became  the  author  of  salvation,  consists  principally  in 
the  offering  up  of  himself  to  death,  in,  and  by  the  shedding 
of  his  blood,  whereby  he  obtained  for  us  eternal  redemption; 
Heb.  ix.  14.  26. 

But  this  Mr.  B.  makes  inquiry  after.     'Q.  8.  How  can 
Christ  save  them  by  his  priesthood  ? 
'A.  Heb.  vii.  25.  ix.  28.' 

Ans.  1.  We  acknowledge  the  use  of  the  intercession  of 
Christ,  for  the  carrying  on,  and  the  completing  of  the  work 
of  our  salvation  :  as  that  also  it  is  the  apostle's  design  there 
to  manifest  his  ability  to  save,  beyond  what  the  Aaronical 
priests  could  pretend  unto,  which  is  mentioned  chap.  vii.  25. 
but,  that  '  he  saves  us  thereby,'  exclusively  to  the  oblation 
he  made  of  himself  at  his  death;  or  any  otherwise,  but  as 
carrying  on  that  work,  whose  foundation  was  laid  therein 
(redemption  being  meritoriously  procured  thereby),  I  suppose 
Mr.  B.  doth  not  think,  that  this  place  is  any  way  useful  to 
prove.  And  that  place  which  he  subjoins  is  not  added  at  all 
to  the  advantage  of  his  intendment :  for  it  is  most  evident, 
that  it  is  of  the  offering  of  Christ  by  death,  and  the  shedding 
of  his  blood,  or  the  sacrifice  of  himself,  as  ver.  26.  that  the 
apostle  there  speaks. 

There  is  not  any  thing  else  that  is  needful  for  me  to  in- 
sist upon  in  this  chapter ;  for  though  the  Scripture  instructs 


CHRIST.S    PRIESTLY     OFFICE.  15 

«s  in  many  other  uses,  that  we  are  to  make  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  priesthood  of  Christ,  than  what  he  expresses  in  his 
last  question,  yet  that  being  one  eminent  one  amongst  them 
(especially  the  foundation  of  coming  with  boldness  to  the 
throne  of  grace,  being  rightl)^  understood),  1  shall  not  need 
to  insist  farther  on  it. 

Not  to  put  myself,  or  reader  to  any  needless  trouble,  Mr. 
B.  acknowledging  that  Christ  is  a  high-priest,  and  having 
opposed  only  his  investiture  with  the  office,  whilst  he  was 
upon  the  earth,  and  that  to  destroy  the  atonement  made  by 
the  sacrifice  of  himself ;  having  proved  that  he  was  a  priest 
properly  so  called  ;  I  shall  now  prove  that  he  was  a  high- 
priest  whilst  he  was  upon  earth,  and  shew  afterward  what 
he  had  to  offer,  with  the  efficacy  of  his  sacrifice,  and  the  in- 
tent thereof.  First,  the  Scripture  will  speedily  determine 
the  difference;  Eph.  v.  2.  'Christ  hath  loved  us,  and  hath 
given  himself  for  us  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God,  for  a 
sweet-smelling  savour.'  He  that  offereth  sacrifices  and  of- 
ferings unto  God,  is  a  priest :  so  the  apostle  defines  a  priest, 
Heb.  V.  1.  He  is  one  'taken  from  amongst  men,'  and  or- 
dained to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sins.  Now  thus  did 
Christ  do,  in  his  giving  himself  for  us  :  TrapfSwKfv,  he  de- 
livered himself  for  us.  To  deliver  himself,  or  to  be  delivered 
for  us,  notes  his  death,  always  in  contradistinction  to  any 
other  act  of  his :  so  Eph.  v.  25.  Gal.  ii.  22.  Rom.  viii.  32. 
iv.  25.  6c  TTopeSoS'ij  ^la  to.  TrapairTiofxaTa  i]fxCov,  koi  rijip^r^  dia 
TTjv  diKaiMCTiv  nf^ojv.  In  that  delivery  of  himself  he  sacrificed  ; 
therefore  he  was  then  a  priest. 

To  this  Socinus invented  an  answer,  in  his  book  *de  Ser- 
vatore,'  which  he  insists  on  again,  Epist.  2.  ad  Niemojev.  and 
whereunto  ''his  followers  have  added  nothing,  it  being  fixed 
on  by  them  all;  in  particular  by  Smalcius  in  Catech.  Racov. 
And  yet  it  is  in  itself  ludicrous,  and  almost  jocular.  The 
words  they  tell  us  are  thus  to  be  read,  TraptStuKtv  iavrov  virlp 
njuiov.  And  there  they  place  a  point  in  the  verse,  irpocrrpopdv 
KoX  ^vaiav  rto  ^i(^-  without  any  dependance  upon  the  former 
words,  making  this  to  be  the  sense  of  the  whole.  Christ 
gave  himself  to  death  for  us;  and  (3  what  an  offering  was 
that  to  God,  and  O  what  a  sacrifice  !  that  is,  in  a  metaphori- 
cal sense  :  not  that  Christ  offered  himself  to  God  for  us  ; 

r  Volkfl.  dc  ver.  Rclig.  lib.  3.  cap.  37.  p.  146. 


16  Christ's  priestly  office. 

but  that  Paul  called  his  giving  himself  to  die,  an  ofFering^, 
or  a  thing  grateful  to  God,  as  good  works  are  called  an  of- 
fering ;  Phil.  iv.  18.  that  is,  the  dying  of  Christ  was  *  prae- 
clarnm  facinus/as  Volkelius  speaks.     But, 

1.  It  is  easy  to  answer  or  avoid  any  thing  by  such  ways 
as  this  ;  divide,  cut  off  sentences  in  the  dependance  of  the 
words,  and  you  may  make  what  sense  of  them  you  please; 
or  none  at  all. 

2.  These  words,  irpoaipopav  icai  ^vaiav,  have  no  other  word- 
to  be  regulated  by,  but  irapidiOKav :  and  therefore  must  relate 
thereunto  ;  and  Christ  is  affirmed  in  them  to  have  given  him- 
self an  offering  and  a  sacrifice. 

3.  These  words,  an  *  offering  and  a  sacrifice,'  are  not  a  com- 
mendation of  Christ's  giving  himself,  but  an  illustration,  and 
a  description  of  what  he  gave  ;  that  is,  himself  a  sacrifice  of 
sweet  savour  to  God.  So  that  notwithstanding  this  excep- 
tion (becoming  only  them  that  make  it),  it  is  evident  from 
hence,  that  Christ  offered  himself  a  sacrifice  in  his  death, 
and  was  therefore  then  a  priest  fitted  for  that  work. 

2.  Heb.  v.  6,  7.  *  As  he  saith  also  in  another  place.  Thou 
art  a  priest  for  ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchisedec  :  who  in 
the  days  of  his  flesh,  when  he  had  offered  up  prayers  and 
supplications,  with  strong  cries  and  tears,  unto  him  that  was 
able  to  save  him  from  death ;'  ver.  6.  The  apostle  tells  us, 
that  he  was  a  priest ;  and,  ver.  7.  what  he  did  by  virtue  of 
that  priesthood,  vpocriviyKS  StT/crE'C  Km  tKiTr^piag.  It  is  a  tem- 
ple expression  of  the  office  of  a  priest,  that  is  used.  So  ver.  1. 
a  high-priest  is  appointed  'Iva  Trpoa^ipy^,  that  he  may  offer. 
Now  when  did  Christ  do  this  ?  It  was  in  the  days  of  his  flesh, 
'  with  strong  cries  and  tears,'  both  which  evidence  this  his  of- 
fering to  have  been  before  his  death,  and  at  his  death  ;  and 
his  mentioning  of  prayers  and  tears,  is  not  so  much  to  shew 
the  matter  of  his  offering,  which  was  himself,  as  the  manner, 
or  at  least  the  concomitants  of  the  sacrifice  of  himself, 
prayers,  and  tears  ;  and  these  were  not  for  himself,  but  for 
his  church,  and  the  business  that  for  their  sakes  he  had  un- 
dertaken. 

3.  Heb.  i.  3.  'When  he  had  by  hifnself  purged  our  sins, 
sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high.'  The 
purging  of  our  sins  was  by  sacrifice ;  there  was  never  any 
other  way  Ka^apirrfiov  ;  but  now  Christ  did  this  before  his  as- 


Christ's  puiestly   office.  17 

cension :  Ka^apiafiov  rrotr](jafxtvog,  when  he  had  himself,  or 
after  he  had  purged  our  sins  ;  and  that  St  mvTov,  hy  himself, 
or  the  sacrifice  of  himself.  That  our  sins  are  purged  by  the 
oblation  of  Christ,  the  Scripture  is  clear  ;  hence  his  blood 
is  said  to  'wash  us  from  all  our  sins.'  And  Heb.  x.  10.  'sanc- 
tified,' is  the  same  with  'purged  :'  and  this  through  the  offer- 
ing of  the  body  of  Christ;  £^a7ro|  Christ  then  offering  this 
sacrifice  whilst  he  was  on  the  earth,  was  a  priest  in  so  doing. 

Unto  this  may  be  added  sundry  others  of  the  same  im- 
port ;  chap.  vii.  27.  '  Who  needed  not  daily,  as  those  high- 
priests,  to  offer  up  sacrifice,  first  for  his  own  sins,  and  then 
for  the  people's ;  for  this  he  did  once,  when  he  offered  up  him- 
self.' The  one  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  here  compared  to  the 
daily  sacrifices  of  the  priests.  Now  those  daily  sacrifices 
were  not  performed  in  the  most  holy  place,  whither  the  high 
priest  entered  but  once  in  a  year,  which  alone  was  a  represen- 
tation of  heaven ;  so  that  what  Christ  did  in  heaven  cannot 
answer  to  them,  but  what  he  did  on  earth,  before  he  entered 
the  holy  place,  not  made  with  hands. 

And  chap.  ix.  12.  '  He  entered  by  his  own  blood  into 
the  holy  place,  auoviav  Xvrpwaiv  ivpafievog,  after  he  had  ob- 
tained eternal  redemption.'  Redemption  is  every  where  in 
the  Scripture  ascribed  to  the  blood  of  Christ.  And  him- 
self abundantly  manifesteth  on  what  account  it  is  to  be  had, 
when  he  says,  that  he  gave  his  life  a  ransom,  or  a  price  of 
redemption.  Where,  and  when  Christ  laid  down  his  life, 
we  know  :  and  yet  that  our  redemption  or  freedom  is  by  the 
offering  of  Christ  for  us,  is  as  evident;  chap.  ix.  26.  'He  puts 
away  sin  (which  is  our  redemption)  by  the  sacrifice  of  him- 
self;'  so  that  this  sacrifice  of  himself,  was  before  he  entered 
the  holy  place  ;  and  consequently  he  was  a  priest  before  his 
entrance  into  heaven.  It  is,  I  say,  apparent  from  these  places, 
that  Christ  offered  himself  before  he  went  into  the  holy 
place,  or  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high, 
which  was  to  be  proved  from  them. 

4.  Christ  is  often  said  to  offer  himself  once  for  all  :  de- 
signing by  that  expression  some  individual  action  of  Christ, 
and  not  such  a  continued  course  of  procedure,  as  is  his  pre- 
sentation of  himself  in  heaven  ;  or  the  continuation  of  his 
oblation,  as  to  its  efficacy  by  his  intercession  ;  so  Heb.  vii. 
27.  TovTO  £7rojr/(T£v  £(^a7ra^.    ix.   28.    otto?  TTpoaivt\^iig-   &c. 


18  CIIRISTS     PRIES'J'LY    OFFICE. 

X.  10.  12.  14.  In  all  these  places  the  offering  of  Christ 
is  not  only  said  to  be  one,  but  to  be  once  offered ;  now  no 
offering  of  Christ,  besides  that  which  he  offered  on  the  earth, 
can  be  said  to  be  once  offered.  For  that  which  is  done  in 
heaven  is  done  always,  and  for  ever;  but  that  which  is  done 
always,  cannot  be  said  to  be  done  once  for  all.  To  be  al- 
ways done,  or  in  doing,  as  is  Christ's  offering  himself  in  hea- 
ven, and  to  be  done  once  for  all,  as  was  the  oblation  spoken 
of  in  those  places,  whereby  our  sins  are  done  away,  are  plain- 
ly contradictory.  It  is  said  to  be  so  offered  aira^,,  as  to  be 
opposed  unto  TroWaKig,  vv'hereby  the  apostle  expresses  that 
of  the  Aaronical  sacrifice,  which  in  two  other  words  he  had 
before  delivered  ;  they  were  offered  dir^veKeg,  and  kut  r^fjiepav  ; 
that  is,  TToXXaKig,  in  which  sense  his  offering  himself  in  hea- 
ven cannot  be  said  to  be  done  aira^,  but  only  that  on  the 
cross.  Besides,  he  was  ottos  Trpu)(jeve-)(^iig  dg  to  ttoWojv 
aviv^yKeiv  afxapriag,  ver.  28.  and  how  he  did  that  we  are  in- 
formed, 1  Pet.  ii.  24.  "Og  rag  afxapriag  i)inov  avTog  avi^vejKev 
iv  T(^  (TMfxaTi  avTov  £771  TO  ^v\ov'  lic  did  it  in  his  body  on  the 
tree. 

Besides,  the  apostle,  Heb.  ix.  26.  tells  us,  that  he  speaks 
of  such  an  offering,  as  was  accompanied  with  suffering  :  he 
must  have  often  suffered  since  the  foundation  of  the  world. 
It  was  such  an  offering,  as  could  neither  be  repeated  nor 
continued  without  suffering  that  he  treats  of.  We  do  not 
deny,  that  Christ  offers  himself  in  heaven ;  that  is,  that  he 
presents  himself,  as  one  that  was  so  offered,  to  his  Father  : 
but  the  offering  of  himself,  that  was  on  earth,  and  therefore 
there  was  he  a  priest. 

5.  Once  more ;  that  sacrifice  which  answered  those  sa- 
crifices, whose  blood  was  never  carried  into  the  holy  place; 
that  must  be  performed  on  earth,  and  not  in  heaven.  That 
many  proper  sacrifices  were  offered  as  types  of  Christ,  whose 
blood  was  not  carried  into  the  holy  place,  the  apostle  assures 
us,  Heb.  X.  11.  The  daily  sacrifices  had  none  of  their  blood 
carried  into  the  holy  place  ;  for  the  high-priest  went  in  thi- 
ther only  once  in  the  year.  But  now  these  were  all  true  sa- 
crifices and  types  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ;  afid  therefore, 
the  sacrifices  of  Christ  also,  to  answer  the  types,  must  be 
offered  before  his  entrance  into  heaven,  as  was  in  part  de- 
clared before.     Yea,  there  was  no  other  sacrifice  of  these. 


THE    DEATH     OF    CHRIST,    &C.  19 

but  what  was  performed  in  their  killing  and  slaying;  and 
therefore,  there  must  be  a  sacrifice  prefigured  by  them,  con- 
sisting in  killing  and  shedding  of  blood.  All  this  is  asserted 
by  the  apostle,  Heb.  vii.  27,  '  Who  needeth  not  daily  as  those 
high-priests,  to  ofiler  up  sacrifices,  for  this  lie  did  once,  when 
he  offered  up  himself.  Those  sacrifices  which  were  offered 
KaO*  rifxtpav,  '  daily,'  were  types  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ ;  and 
that  of  his,  which  was  offered  t^aTro^,  did  answer  thereunto; 
which  was  his  death,  and  nothing  else. 


CHAP.  XXI. 

Of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  causes,  ends,  and  fruits  thereof,  with  an  entrance 
into  the  doctrine  of  his  satisfaction  thereby. 

Mr.  Biddle's  12th  chapter  is  concerning  the  death  of 
Christ,  the  causes,  and  fruits,  and  ends  thereof :  the  error 
and  mistake  whereabout,  iis  the  second  great  head  of  the 
Socinian  religion  ;  next  to  his  person  there  is  not  any  thing 
they  set  themselves  so  industriously  to  oppose  as  his  death, 
in  the  sense  wherein  it  hath  constantly  hitherto  been  em- 
braced by  all  Christians,  as  the  great  foundation  of  their 
faith  and  confidence. 

That  the  Lord  Jesus  our  Mediator,  did  not  by  his  death 
and  sufferings  undergo  the  penalty  of  the  law  as  the  punish- 
ment due  to  our  sins,  that  he  did  not  make  satisfaction  to 
God,  or  make  reconciliation  for  transgressors,  that  he  did 
not  thereby  properly  redeem  us  by  the  payment  of  a  ran- 
som, nor  so  suffer  for  us,  as  that  our  sins  should  in  the  jus- 
tice of  God  be  a  meritorious  cause  of  his  suffering,  is  the  se- 
cond great  article  of  the  creed,  which  they^  labour  to  assert 
and  maintain. 

There  is  not  anything  about  which  they  have  laid  out  so 
much  of  their  strength  as  about  this;  namely,  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  called  our  Saviour  in  respect  of  the  way  of  salva- 
tion, which  he  hath  revealed  to  us,  and  the  power  committed 
to  him  to  deliver  us,  and  save  us,  in  and  by  obedience  re- 
quired at  our  hands,  nor  on  the  account  of  any  satisfaction 

a  Vid.  Faust.  Sociii.  de  Jes.  Christ.  Servator.  Prrelect.  Theol.  Lect.  Sac.  Pseraen. 
ad  Volan.  Epistola  ad  Nieniojev.Tlies.  de  Jiislif.  Smal.  Ref.  Thcs.  Fran.  adv.  Smigl. 
Nov.  Monst.  Catec  Rac.  &c.  Crelli.  dc  Cans.  Mor.  Clirist.  Vindic.  ad  Grot.  Volkcl. 
Ver.  Rrlig.  Christ.  Ostorod.  Institut.  cap.  11.  Suhliuhting.  Epist.  ad  Hcbr.T.  &c. 


20  THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST  I 

he  hath  made  for  us,  or  atonement  by  the  sacrifice  of  him- 
self. 

How  Faustus  Socinus  first  broached  this  opinion,  with 
what  difficulty  he  got  it  to  be  entertained  with  the  men  of 
his  own  profession,  as  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  has 
been  before  declared.  What  weight  he  laid  upon  this  opi- 
nion about  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  opposition  he  had 
engaged  in  against  his  satisfaction,  with  the  diligence  he 
used,  and  the  pains  he  took  about  the  one  and  the  other,  is 
evident  from  his  writings  to  this  purpose  which  are  yet  ex- 
tant. His  book,  *De  Jesu  Christo  Servatore'  is  wholly  taken 
up  with  this  argument;  so  is  the  greatest  part  of  his  'Prae- 
lections ;'  his  '  Lectiones  Sacrse'  are  some  of  them  of  the  same 
subject;  and  his  '  Parsenesis'  against  Volanus  ;  many  of  his 
Epistles,  especially  those  to  Smalcius,  and  Volkelius,  and 
Niemojevius,  as  also  his  treatises  about  justification,  have 
the  same  design.  Smalcius  is  no  less  industrious  in  the 
same  cause,  both  in  his  Racovian  catechism,  and  his  answers 
and  replies  with  Franzius  and  Smiglecius.  It  is  the  main 
design  of  Schlichtingius's  comment  on  the  Hebrews  ;  Crel- 
Kus,  *  de  Causis  mortis  Christi,'  and  his  defence  of  Socinus 
against  Grotius  dwells  on  this  doctrine.  Volkelius  hath  his 
share  in  the  same  work,  &c. 

What  those  at  large  contend  for,  Mr.  Biddle  endea- 
vours slily  to  insinuate  into  his  catechumens  in  this  chap- 
ter :  having  thereby  briefly  spoken  of  salvation  by  Christ, 
and  of  his  mediation  in  general,  in  consideration  of  his  sixth 
and  seventh  chapters,  I  shall  now,  God  assisting,  take  up  the 
whole  matter,  and  after  a  brief  discovery  of  his  intendment 
in  his  queries  concerning  the  death  of  Christ,  give  an  ac- 
count of  our  whole  doctrine  of  his  satisfaction,  confirming  it 
from  the  Scriptures,  and  vindicating  it  from  the  exceptions 
of  his  masters. 

For  the  order  of  procedure,  I  shall  first  consider  Mr.  Bid- 
die's  questions  ;  then  state  the  point  in  diflference,  by  ex- 
pressing what  is  the  judgment  of  our  adversaries  concerning 
the  death  of  Christ,  and  what  we  ascribe  thereto  ;  and  then 
demonstrate  from  the  Scripture  the  truth  contended  for. 

Mr.  Riddle's  first  question  is, 

'  Was  it  the  will  and  purpose  of  God  that  Christ  should 
suft'er  the  death  of  the  cross  ?    What  saith  the  apostle  Peter 


ITS    CAUSES,    ENDS,    AXD    EFFECTS.  21 

to  the  Jews  concernino-  this  ?  A.  Acts  ii.  22,  23.'  To  which 
he  subjoins,  'What  say  the  disciples  in  general  concerning 
the  same  ?  A.  Acts  iv.  24.  27,  28.' 

It  is  not  unknown  what  difference  we  have,  both  with 
the  Socinians  and  Arminians,  about  the  purposes  and  effica- 
cious decrees,  and  the  infallibility  of  the  prescience  of  God  : 
something  already  hath  been  spoken  to  this  purpose,  in  our 
discourse  concerning  the  prescience  of  God,  as  formerly  in 
that  of  perseverance.  How  unable  Mr.  Biddle's  companions 
are  to  disentangle  themselves  from  the  evidence  of  that  tes- 
timony,  which  is  given  to  the  truth  we  contend  for,  by  these 
texts  which  here  he  with  so  much  confidence  recites,  hath 
been  abundantly  by  others  demonstrated.  I  shall  not  here 
enter  into  the  merits  of  that  cause,  nor  shall  I  impose  on 
Mr.  Biddle  the  opinion  of  any  other  men,  which  he  doth  not 
expressly  own  ;  only  I  shall  desire  him  to  reconcile  what  he 
here  speaks  in  his  query,  with  what  he  before  delivered  con- 
cerning God's  '  not  foreseeing  our  free  actions,  that  are  for 
to  come.'  What  God  purposes  shall  be  and  come  to  pass, 
he  certainly  foresees  that  that  will  come  to  pass.  That 
Christ  should  die  the  death  of  the  cross  was  to  be  brought 
about  by  the  free  actions  of  men,  if  any  thing  in  the  world  was 
ever  so,  and  accomplished  in  the  same  manner;  yet  that  this 
should  be  done,  yea,  so  done,  God  purposed ;  and  therefore 
without  doubt  foresaw  that  it  should  be  accomplished,  and 
so  foresaw  all  the  free  actions  whereby  it  was  accomplished. 
And  if  he  foresaw  any  one  free  action,  why  not  all?  there 
being  the  same  reason  of  one  and  all.  But  at  the  present 
let  this  pass.     His  second  question  is, 

*  Did  Christ  die  to  reconcile  and  bring  God  to  us,  or  on 
the  contrary,  to  bring  us  to  God  ? 

'A.  Rom.v.  lO.Eph.ii.  14.  16.  2  Cor.  v.  19.  1  Pet.  iii.  18.' 

That  I  may,  by  the  way,  speak  a  little  to  this  question, 
reservino'  the  full  discussion  of  the  matter  intended  to  the 
ensuing  discourse;  the  terms  of  it  are  first  to  be  explained, 

1.  By'  reconciling  God,' we  intend  the  making  of  such  an 
atonement,  whereby  his  wrath  or  anger,  in  all  the  effects  of 
it,  are  turned  away.  Though  we  use  not  the  expression  of 
reconciling  God  to  us,  but  of  reconciling  us  to  God,  by  the 
taking  away,  or  removal  of  his  wrath  and  anger,  or  the 
making  reconciliation  with  God  for  sin  ;  yet  as  to  reconcile 


22  THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST: 

God,  intends  the  appeasing  of  the  justice  and  anger  of  God, 
so  that,  whereas  before  we  were  obnoxious  to  his  displea- 
sure, enmity,  hatred,  and  wrath  thereby,  and  on  that  account 
we  come  to  be  accepted  with  him,  we  say  Christ  died  to  re- 
concile God  to  us,  which  in  the  progress  of  this  discourse 
with  plentiful  demonstrations  from  the  Scripture  shall  be 
evinced. 

2.  Of 'bringing  God  to  us,'  we  speak  not;  imless  by 
bringing  God  to  us,  he  intends  the  procurement  of  the  grace 
and  favour  of  God  toward  us,  and  his  loving  presence  to  be 
with  us,  and  then  we  say,  in  that  sense,  Christ  by  his  death 
brought  God  to  us. 

3.  Our  '  reconciliation  to  God,'  or  the  reconciliation  as  it 
stands  on  our  part,  is  our  conversion  unto  God,  our  deliver- 
ance from  all  that  enmity  and  opposition  unto  God,  which 
is  in  us  by  nature ;  and  this  also  we  say  is  the  effect  and  fruit 
of  the  death  of  Christ. 

4.  Our'  bringing  unto  God,'  mentioned,  1  Pet.  iii.  18.  is 
of  a  larger  and  more  comprehensive  signification,  than  that 
of  our  reconciliation ;  containing  the  whole  effect  of  the 
death  of  Christ,  in  the  removal  of  every  hinderance,  and  the 
collation  of  every  thing  necessarily  required  to  the  perfect 
and  complete  accomplishment  of  the  work  of  our  salvation, 
and  so  contains  no  less  the  reconciliation  of  God  to  us,  than 
ours  to  him ;  and  is  not  proper  to  make  up  one  member  of 
the  division  there  instituted,  being  a  general  expression  of 
them  both. 

Now  concerning  these  things  Mr.  Biddle  inquires,  '  Whe- 
ther Christ  by  his  death  reconciled  God  to  us,  or  on  the 
contrary,  us  to  God  V  So  insinuating  that  one  of  these  effects 
of  the  death  of  Christ  is  inconsistent  with  the  other;  this 
seems  to  be  the  man's  aim. 

1.  To  intimate  that  this  is  the  state  of  the  difference  be- 
tween him  and  us ;  that  we  say,  Christ  died  to  '  reconcile 
God  to  us  ;'  and  he,  that  he  died  to  '  reconcile  us  to  God.' 

2.  That  these  things  are  contrary,  so  that  they  who  say 
the  one,  must  deny  the  other;  that  we  who  say,  that  Christ 
died  to  reconcile  God  to  us,  must  of  necessity  deny  that  he 
died  to  reconcile  us  to  God;  and  that  he  also,  who  saith, 
he  died  to  reconcile  us  to  God,  may,  and  must  deny,  on  that 
account,  the  other  effect  by  us  ascribed  to  his  death.     But 


ITS    CAUSES,    ENDS,    AND    EFFECTS.  23 

this  sophistry  is  so  gross,  as  it  is  not  worth  the  while  to  in- 
sist upon  its  discovery  ;  we  say,  that  Christ  died  to  reconcile 
God  to  us  in  the  sense  before  explained,  and  us  unto  God ; 
and  these  things  are  so  far  from  being  of  any  repugnancy 
one  to  another,  as  to  the  making  up  of  one  entire  end  and 
effect  of  the  death  of  Christ,  that  without  them  both,  the 
work  of  reconciliation  is  by  no  means  complete. 

Not  to  prevent  the  full  proof  and  evidence  hereof,  which 
is  intended,  it  may  at  present  suffice,  that  we  evince  it  by  the 
light  of  this  one  consideration:  If  in  the  Scripture  it  is  ex- 
pressly and  frequently  affirmed,  that  antecedently  to  the 
consideration  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  effects  thereof, 
there  is  not  only  a  real  enmity  on  our  parts  against  God,  but 
also  a  law  enmity  on  the  part  of  God  against  us,  and  that 
both  of  these  are  removed  by  virtue  of  the  death  of  Christ; 
then  the  reconciliation  of  God  to  us,  and  our  reconciliation 
to  God,  are  both  of  them  one  entire  effect  of  the  death  of 
Christ.  That  there  is  in  us  by  nature  a  real  enmity  against 
God,  before  it  be  taken  away  by  the  virtue  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  and  so  we  reconciled  to  him,  is  not  denied  ;  and  if 
it  were,  it  might  be  easily  evinced  from  Rom.  viii.  7,  8.  Tit. 
iii.  3.  Eph.  ii.  12.  and  innumerable  other  places;  and  cer- 
tainly the  evidence  on  the  other  side,  that  there  was  a  law 
enmity  on  the  part  of  God  against  us,  antecedent  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  death  of  Christ,  is  no  less  clear.  The  great 
sanction  of  the  law.  Gen.  iii.  Deut.  xxvii.  29.  considered  in 
conjunction  with  the  justice  of  God,  Rom.  i.  32.  Hab.  i.  13. 
Psal.  v.  4 — 6.  2Thess.  x.  5,  6.  and  the  testimonies  given 
concerning  the  state  and  condition  of  man  in  reference  to 
the  law  and  justice  of  God,  John  iii.  36.  Rom.  v.  18.  Eph. 
ii.  3.  12,  &c.  with  the  express  assignation  of  the  reconcilia- 
tion pleaded  for,  to  be  made  by  the  death  of  Christ,  Dan. 
ix.  24.  Heb.  ii.  18.  do  abundantly  evince  it;  there  being- 
then  a  mutual  enmity  between  God  and  us,  though  not  of 
the  same  kind  (it  being  physical  on  our  part,  and  legal  or 
moral  on  the  part  of  God),  Christ  our  Mediator  making  up 
peace  and  friendship  between  us,  doth  not  only  reconcile  us 
to  God  by  his  Spirit,  but  God  also  to  us,  by  his  blood  ;  but 
of  this  more  afterward  under  the  consideration  of  the  death 
of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  sacrifice. 

For  the  texts  cited  by  Mr.  Biddle,  as  making  to  his  pur- 


24  THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST  : 

pose,  the  most,  if  not  all  of  them  look  another  way  than  he 
intends  to  use  them.  They  will  in  the  following  chapter 
come  under  full  consideration.  Rom.  v.  10.  'When  we  were 
enemies  we  were  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of  his  Son;' 
is  the  first  mentioned.  That  our  being  reconciled  to  God, 
in  this  place  doth  not  intend  our  conversion  to  him,  and  our 
deposition  of  the  real  enmity,  that  is  in  us  against  him,  but 
our  acceptance  with  him,  upon  the  account  of  the  atonement 
made  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  whereby  he  is  reconciled  to  us, 
is  evident  from  sundry  circumstances  of  the  place.     For, 

1.  That  which  is  called  '  being  reconciled  by  his  death,' 
in  ver.  10.  is  '  being  justified  by  his  blood;'  ver.  9.  The  ob- 
servation of  the  same  antithesis  in  both  verses  makes  this 
evident.  Now  to  be  j  ustified  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  is  not  to 
have  our  enmity  with  God  slain  and  destroyed  (which  is  our 
sanctification),  but  our  acceptation  with  God  upon  the  ac- 
count of  the  shedding  of  the  blood  of  Christ  for  us  ;  which 
is  his  reconciliation  to  us. 

2.  We  are  thus  reconciled,  when  we  are  enemies,  as  in  the 
verse  insisted  on  ;  '  when  we  were  enemies  we  were  recon- 
ciled.' Now  we  are  not  reconciled  in  the  sense  of  deposing 
our  enmity  to  God  (that  deposition  being  our  sanctification) 
whilst  we  are  enemies,  and  therefore  it  is  the  reconciliation 
of  God  to  us,  that  is  intended. 

3.  Ver.  11.  we  are  said  to  receive  this  reconciliation;  or 
as  the  word  is  rendered,  the  '"  atonement ;'  the  word  is  the 
same  with  that  used  ver.  10.  Now  we  cannot  be  said  to 
receive  our  own  conversion,  but  the  reconciliation  of  God 
by  the  blood  of  Christ,  his  favour  upon  the  atonement  made, 
that  by  faith  we  do  receive.  Thus  Mr.  Biddle's  first  witness 
speaks  expressly  against  him,  and  the  design  for  the  carry- 
ing on  whei^eof  he  was  called  forth  ;  as  afterward  will  more 
fully  appear. 

His  second  also,  of  Eph.  ii.  14.  16.  speaks  the  same 
language ;  *  He  is  pur  peace,  who  hath  made  both  one,  that 
he  might  reconcile  both  unto  God  in  one  body,  by  his 
cross,  having  slain  the  enmity  thereby;'  setting  aside  the 
joint  design  of  the  apostle  to  manifest  the  reconciliation 
made  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  by  the  cross  of  Christ,  it  is  evi- 
dent the  reconciliation  here  meant,  consists  in  slaying  the 

^  Karal\'Kayhv. 


ITS    CAUSES,    ENDS,    AND    EFFECTS.  25 

enmity  mentioned,  so  making  peace.  Now  what  is  the 
enmity  intended  ?  Not  the  enmity  that  is  in  our  hearts  to 
God,  but  the  legal  enmity  that  lay  against  us,  on  the  part  of 
God;  as  is  evident  from  ver.  15.  and  the  whole  desion  of  the 
place,  as  afterward  will  appear  more  fully. 

There  is  indeed,  2  Cor.  v.  18 — 20.  mention  made  of  re- 
conciliation in  both  the  senses  insisted  on;  of  us  to  God; 
ver.  20.  where  the  apostle  saith,  the  end  of  the  ministry  is 
to  reconcile  us  to  God;  to  prevail  with  us  to  lay  down  our 
enmity  against  him,  and  opposition  to  him ;  of  God  to  us, 
ver.  19.  '  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to  him- 
self;' which  to  be  the  import  of  the  words  is  evinced  from 
the  exegetical  expression  immediately  following;  'not  im- 
puting to  them  their  sins  and  transgressions ;'  God  was  so 
reconciling  the  world  unto  himself  in  Christ,  as  that  upon 
the  account  of  what  was  done  in  Christ,  he  will  not  impute 
their  sins  ;  the  legal  enmity  he  had  against  them,  on  the  ac- 
count whereof  alone  men's  sins  are  imputed  to  them,  being 
taken  away.  And  this  is  farther  cleared  by  the  sum  of  his 
former  discourse,  which  the  apostle  gives  us,  ver.  21.  declar- 
ing how  '  God  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  to  him- 
self;' 'For,'  saith  he,  'he  made  him  sin  for  us  who  knew  no 
sin,  that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in 
him.'  Thus  he  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to  himself; 
in  that  he  made  him  to  be  sin,  or  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  so  to 
make  an  atonement  for  us,  that  we  might  be  accepted  before 
God,  as  righteous  on  the  account  of  Christ. 

Much  less  doth  that  of  the  1  Pet.  iii.  18.  in  the  last 
place  mentioned,  speak  at  all  to  Mr.  B.'s  purpose  :  '  Christ 
hath  once  suffered  for  sin,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he 
might  bring  us  to  God.'  '  Bringing  to  God,'  is  a  general  ex- 
pression of  the  accomplishment  of  the  whole  work  of  our 
salvation,  both  in  the  removal  of  all  hinderances,  and  the 
collation  of  all  things  necessary  to  the  fulfilling  of  the  work  : 
of  this  the  apostle  mentions  the  great  fundamental  and  pro- 
curing cause,  which  is  the  suffering  of  Christ  in  our  stead, 
the  just  for  the  unjust;  Christ  in  our  stead  suffered  for  our 
sins,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God.  Now  this  suffering  of 
Christ  in  our  stead,  for  our  sins,  is  most  eminently  the  cause 
of  the  reconciliation  of  God  to  us ;  and  by  the  intimation 

VOL.   IX.  1) 


26  THE    DICATII     OF    CHRIST: 

thereof,  of  our  reconciliation  to  God,  and  so  of  our  manuduc- 
tion  to  him. 

Thus,  though  it  be  most  true,  that  Christ  died  to  recon- 
cile us  to  God,  by  our  conversion  to  him,  yet  all  the  places 
cited  by  Mr.  Biddle  to  prove  it  (so  unhappy  is  he  in  his  quo- 
tations), speak  to  the  defence  of  that  truth,  which  he  doth 
oppose,  and  not  of  that  which  he  would  assert;  and  which 
by  asserting  in  opposition  to  the  truth,  with  which  it  hath 
an  eminent  consistency,  he  doth  corrupt. 

The  next  question  1  shall  not  insist  upon  ;  it  is  concern- 
ing the  object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  universality 
thereof;  the  words  of  it  are,  '  For  whom  did  Christ  die?' 
The  answer  is  from  2  Cor.  v.  14,  15.  1  Tim.  v.  6.  Heb.  ii.  9. 
John  vi.  8.  where  mention  is  made  of 'all/ and  the  'world' in 
reference  to  the  death  of  Christ.  The  question  concerning 
the  object  of  the  death  of  Christ,  or  whom  he  died  for,  hath 
of  late  by  very  many  been  fully  discussed ;  and  I  have  my- 
self spoken  ^elsewhere  somewhat  to  that  purpose ;  it  shall 
not  then  here  be  insisted  on ;  in  a  word,  we  confess  that 
Christ  died  for  all,  and  for  the  world;  but  whereas  it  is  very 
seldom  that  these  words  are  comprehensive  of  all  and  every 
man  in  the  world,  but  most  frequently  are  used  for  some  of 
all  sorts,  they  for  whom  Christ  died,  being  in  some  places 
expounded  to  be  the  'church,  believers,  the  children,  those 
given  unto  him  out  of  the  world ;'  and  nowhere  described  by 
any  term  expressive  constantly  of  an  absolute  universality : 
we  say  the  words  insisted  on  are  to  be  taken  in  the  latter 
sense,  and  not  the  former ;  being  ready,  God  assisting,  to 
put  it  to  the  issue  and  trial  with  our  adversaries,  when  we 
are  called  thereunto. 

He  proceeds :  *  What  was  the  procuring  cause  of  Christ's 
death  ? 

'  A.  Rom.  iv.  25.  Isa.  liii.  5.  1  Cor.  xv.  3.'  The  expres- 
sions are  ;  that  '  Christ  was  delivered  for  our  offences/  that 
'  Christ  died  for  our  sins,  and  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities.' 

That  in  these  and  the  like  places,  that  clause  for  our 
sins,  offences,  and  transgressions,  is  expressive  of  the  pro- 
curing cause  of  the  death  of  Christ,  Mr.  B.  grants  j  sin  can 
be  no  otherwise  the  procuring  cause  of  the  death  of  Christ, 

"  Saliis  Elecforiim  sanguis  Jesu. 


ITS    CAUSES,    ENDS,    AND    EFFECTS.  27 

but  as  it  is  morally  meritorious  thereof.  To  say  *  our  sins 
were  the  procuring  cause  of  the  death  of  Christ,'  is  to  say, 
that  our  sins  merited  the  death  of  Christ;  and  whereas  this 
can  no  otherwise  be,  but  as  our  sins  were  imputed  to  him, 
and  he  was  put  to  death  for  them,  Mr.  B.  hath' in  this  one 
question  granted  the  whole  of  what  in  this  subject  he  con- 
tends against.  If  our  sins  were  the  procuring  cause  of  the 
death  of  Christ,  then  the  death  of  Christ  was  that  punish- 
ment which  was  due  to  them  :  or  in  the  justice,  or  according 
to  the  tenor  of  the  law  of  God,  was  procured  by  them ;  and 
so  consequently,  he  in  his  death  underwent  the  penalty  of 
our  sins,  suffering  in  our  stead,  and  making  thereby  satis- 
faction for  what  we  had  done  amiss.  Mr.  Biddle's  masters 
say  generally  that  the  expression  of,  '  dying  for  our  sins,'  de- 
notes the  final  cause  of  the  deatli  of  Christ;  that  is,  Christ 
intended  by  his  death  to  confirm  the  truth,  in  obedience 
whereunto  we  shall  receive  forgiveness  of  sin  ;  this  grant  of 
Mr.  B.'s,  that  the  procuring  cause  of  the  death  of  Christ  is 
hereby  expressed,  will  perhaps  appear  more  prejudicial  to  his 
whole  cause,  than  he  is  yet  aware  of;  especially  being  pro- 
posed in  distinction  from  the  final  cause,  or  end  of  the  death 
of  Christ,  which  in  the  next  place  he  mentions,  as  afterward 
will  more  fully  appear ;  although  I  confess  he  is  not  alone, 
Crellius'^  making  tlie  same  concession. 

The  last  question  of  this  chapter  is,  '  What  are  the  ends 
of  Christ's  suffering  and  death  intimated  by  the  Scripture?' 
Whereunto  by  way  of  answer,  sundry  texts  of  Scripture  are 
subjoined  ;  every  one  of  them  expressing  some  one  end  or 
other,  some  effect  or  fruit,  something  of  the  aim  and  intend- 
ment of  Christ  in  his  suffering  and  death  ;  whereunto  ex- 
ceeding many  others  might  be  annexed.  But  this  business 
of  the  death  of  Christ,  its  causes,  ends,  and  influence  into 
the  work  of  our  salvation,  the  manifestation  that  therein  he 
underwent  the  punishment  due  to  our  sins,  making  atone- 
ment, and  giving  satisfaction  for  them,  redeeming  us  pro- 
perly by  the  price  of  his  blood,  &c.  being  of  so  great  weight 
and  importance  as  it  is,  lying  at  the  very  bottom  and 
foundation  of  all  our  hope  and  confidence,  I  shall,  leaving 
Mr.  Biddle,  handle  the  whole  matter  at  large  in  the  ensuing 
chapters. 

<•  Crellius  dc  Causis  Mortis  Chiisli.  p.  13. 
D    2 


28  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

For  our  more  clear  and  distinct  procedure  in  this  impor- 
tant head  of  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  I  shall  first  lay- 
down  the  most  eminent  considerations  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
as  proposed  in  the  Scripture ;  and  then  give  an  account  of 
the  most  special  effects  of  it  in  particular,  answering  to 
those  considerations  of  it ;  in  all  manifesting  wherein  the 
expiation  of  our  sins  by  his  blood  doth  consist. 

The  principal  considerations  of  the  death  of  Christ,  are 
of  it,  1.  as  a  price ;  2.  as  a  sacrifice;  3.  as  a  penalty.  Of 
which  in  the  order  wherein  they  are  mentioned. 


CHAP.    XXII. 

The  several  considerations  of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  to  the  expiation  of  our 
sins  thereby,  and  the  satisfaction  made  therein :  First,  of  it  as  a  price. 
Secondly,  as  a  sacrifice. 

1.  The  death  of  Christ  in  this  business  is  a  price  :  and  that 
properly  so  called ;  1  Cor.  vi.  20.  riyopda^r^Te  Tifir\g,  *  you 
were  bought  with  a  price ;'  and  if  we  will  know  what  that 
price  was,  with  which  we  are  bought,  the  Holy  Ghost  in- 
forms us,  1  Pet.  i.  17,  18.  '  Ye  were  not  redeemed  with  cor- 
ruptible things,  as  silver  and  gold,  but  with  the  precious 
blood  of  Christ.'  It  is  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  in  this 
business  hath  that  use  which  silver  and  gold  have  in  the  re- 
deeming of  captives;  and  paid  it  is  into  the  hand  of  him, 
by  whose  power  and  authority  the  captive  is  detained,  as 
shall  be  proved  ;  and  himself  tells  us  what  a  kind  of  price 
it  is,  that  is  so  paid ;  it  is  \vtqov.  Matt.  xx.  28.  '  He  came 
to  lay  down  his  life,'  Avrpov  avTi  ttoXAwv;  which  for  its  more 
evidence  and  clearness,  is  called,  avTiXvTQov,  1  Tim.  ii.  6.  '  a 
price  of  redemption,'  for  the  delivery  of  another. 

The  first  mention  of  a  ransom  in  the  Scripture  is  in  Exod. 
xxi.  30.  '  If  there  be  laid  on  him  a  sum  of  money,  then  he  shall 
give  for  the  ransom  of  his  life,  whatever  is  laid  on  him.'  The 
word  in  the  original  is  ]inD,  which  the  Septuagint  there  render 
\vTpa'  ^wGH  XvTpa  Trig  ipv)(ric  avTov'  and  it  is  used  again  in 
the  same  sense,  Psal.  xlix.  9.  and  in  both  places  intends  a 
valuable  price,  to  be  paid  for  the  deliverance  of  that,  which 
upon  guilt  became  obnoxious  to  death.  It  is  true,  the  word 
is  from  mD  '  redimere,  vindicare,  asserere  in  libertatem,'  by 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  29 

any  ways  and  means,  by  power,  strength,  or  otherwise.  But 
wherever  it  is  applied  to  such  a  kind  of  redemption,  as  had 
a  price  going  along  with  it,  the  Septuagint  constantly  render 
it  by  aTToXvTpovv,  and  sometimes  XvTpwaacjBai,  otherwise  by 
pvofxai,  and  the  like. 

It  is  then  confessed,  that  mD  in  the  Old  Testament,  is 
sometimes  taken  for  redemit  in  a  metaphorical  sense,  not 
strictly  and  literally,  by  the  intervention  of  a  price ;  but  that 
\vTpiJ)<jaa^ai,  the  word  whereby  it  is  rendered,  when  a  price 
intervened,  is  ever  so  taken  in  the  New  Testament,  is  denied 
Indeed  Moses  is  called  Aurpwrrjc,  Acts  i.  35.  in  reference  to 
the  metaphorical  redemption  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt :  a  deli- 
verance by  power  and  strong  arm  ;  but  shall  we  say  because 
that  word  is  used  improperly  in  one  place,  where  no  price 
could  be  paid,  where  God  plainly  snys,  it  was  not  done  by  a 
price,  but  by  power,  therefore  it  must  be  so  used  in  those 
places,  where  there  is  express  mention  of  a  price,  both  the 
matter  of  it,  and  its  formality  as  a  price,  and  speaketh  not  a 
word  of  doing  it  any  other  way,  but  by  the  payment  of  a 
price.     But  of  this  afterward. 

There  is  mention  of  a  ransom  in  ten  places  of  the  Old 
Testament;  to  ransom,  and  ransomed,  in  two  or  three  more. 
In  two  of  these  places,  Exod.  xxi,  30.  and  Psal.  xlix.  9.  the 
word  is  pHD  from  niD  as  before,  and  rendered  by  the  Sep- 
tuagint Xvrpov,  in  all  other  places  it  is  in  the  Hebrew  "iDD, 
which  properly  signifies  a  propitiation,  as  Psal.  xlix.  8.  which 
the  LXX  have  variously  rendered.  Twice  it  is  mentioned  in 
Job,  chap,  xxxiii.  24.  and  xxxvi.  18.  In  the  first  place,  they 
have  left  it  quite  out,  and  in  the  latter  so  corrupted  the 
sense,  that  they  have  rendered  it  altogether  unintelligible. 
Prov.  vi.  35.  and  xiii.  8.  they  have  properly  rendered  it  Xv- 
rpov, or  a  price  of  redemption,  it  being  in  both  places  used 
in  such  business,  as  a  ransom  useth  to  be  accepted  in.  Chap, 
xxi.  18.  they  have  properly  rendered  it  to  the  subject  mat- 
ter, rrepiKa^apfxa'  TrepiKa^apfiara,  are  things  publicly  devoted 
to  destruction,  as  it  were  to  turn  away  anger  from  others, 
coming  upon  them  for  their  sakes. 

So  is  Ku^appa,  '  Homo  piacularis  pro  lustratione  et  ex- 
piatione  patrise  devotus  ;'  whence  the  word  is  often  used  as 
scelus  in  Latin,  for  a  wicked  man,  a  man  fit  to  be  destroyed 
and  taken  away.     Vpv^uv  Se  kcu  roXpciTov  to  Ka^appun,  says 


30  OF    THE    SATISFACTIOIV    OF    CHRIST. 

he  in  the  ^poet,  KaOap/nog  is  used  in  the  same  sense  by  Hero- 
dotus, Kaoapfibv  rrig  ^(JpTj^  Troiovjaivuyv  'A\aiojv,  A^a/JLavra  tov 
'AioAov,  *  Athamas  was  made  a  piaculum,  or  a  propitiation  for 
the  country.'  Whence  BudiBus  renders  that  of  the  apostle, 
bXTTTip  TTfpt  Ka^apfiaTa  rov  koctjuou  eyevij^nfitv  :  '  nos  tanquam 
piacula  mundi  facti  sumus,  et  succidanese  pro  populo  vic- 
timse  :'  *  we  are  as  the  accursed  things  of  the  world,  and  sa- 
crifices for  the  people :'  reading  the  words,''  loairtp  Ka^apfiara  : 
not  u)g  TrepLKa^apfMOTa.  The  Greek  Scholiast,  who  reads  it  as 
we  commonly  do,  rendering  it  by  aTroaaptafia-a  ;  as  the  Vulgar 
Latin  *  purgamenta,'  to  the  same  purpose ;  such  as  have  all 
manner  of  filth  cast  upon  them. 

And  Isa.  xliii.  3.  *  they  have  rendered  the  same  word  aX- 
Xayfxa,  *  a  commutation  by  price;'  so  Matt.  xvi.  26.  ti  Sw(7£« 
av^puiirog  avToXXayfia  rf)c  i/'i'X^'^  '  *  ^  P"ce  in  exchange.'  Now 
in  all  these  places  and  others,  the  Hebrews  use  the  word  idj 
'  a  propitiation,'  by  way  of  allusion ;  as  is  most  especially  evi- 
dent from  that  of  Isaiah, '  I  will  give  Egypt  a  propitiation  for 
thee  ;*  that  is,  as  God  is  atoned  by  a  propitiatory  sacrifice, 
wherein  something  is  offered  him  in  the  room  of  the  offender, 
so  will  he  do  with  them ;  put  them  into  trouble,  in  room  of 
the  church,  as  the  sacrificed  beast  was,  in  the  room  of  him 
for  whom  it  was  sacrificed  ;  and  hence  does  that  word  sig- 
nify a  ransom,  because  what  God  appointed  in  his  worship 
to  redeem  any  thing,  that  by  the  law  was  devoted,  which 
was  a  compensation  by  his  institution  (as  a  clean  beast  in 
the  room  of  a  firstborn  was  to  be  offered  a  sacrifice  to  God), 
was  so  called.  And  the  word  '  satisfaction,'  which  is  but  once 
used  in  the  Scripture,  or  twice  together;  Numb.  xxxv.  31, 
is  "IDD  in  the  original.  IDD  indeed  is  originally  pitch  or  bi- 
tumen :  hence  what  God  says  to  Noah  about  making  the  ark, 
mDDI  Gen.  vi.  14.  the  Septuagint  have  readered  a<T(j>aXTOj(T£ig 
Ty  o(T^aXr(i» '  bituminabis  bitumine.'  ")DD  in  Pihel,  is  '  placavit, 
expiavit,  expiationem  fecit ;'  because  by  sacrifice  sins  are 
covered,  as  if  they  had  not  been;  to  cover  or  hide,  being  the 
first  use  of  the  word. 

And  this  is  the  rise  and  use  of  the  word  *  ransom'  in  the 
Scripture,  both  ]V"rD  mD  and  "IDD  which  are  rendered  by  Xv- 
rpov,  TTtpiKaS'apjua,  avTiXvrpov,  aXXajfia  '  it  denotes  properly 
a  price  of  redemption,  a  valuable  compensation  made  by 

«■  Aristoph.  in  Plut.  ^   1  Cor.  iv.  13. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  '31 

one  thing  for  another,  either  in  the  native  signification,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  first  word ;  or  by  the  first  translation  or 
it  from  the  sacrifice  of  atonement,  a^s  in  the  latter.  Of  this 
farther  afterward  in  the  business  of  redemption.  For  the 
present  is  sufficeth,  that  the  death  of  Christ  was  a  price  of 
ransom,  and  these  are  the  words  whereby  it  is  expressed. 

2.  It  was  a  sacrifice  ;  and  what  sacrifice  it  was  shall  be 
declared. 

1.  That  Christ  offered  a  sacrifice,  is  abundantly  evident 
from  what  was  said  before,  in  the  consideration  of  the  time 
and  place,  when  and  wherein  Christ  was  a  high-priest.  The 
necessity  of  this  the  apostle  confirms,  Heb.  viii.  3.  'For 
every  high-priest  is  ordained  to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices : 
wherefore  it  is  of  necessity  that  this  man  have  somewhat 
also  to  offer.'  If  he  be  a  priest,  he  must  have  a  sacrifice; 
the  very  nature  of  his  employment  requires  it.  The  whole 
and  entire  office  and  employment  of  a  high-priest,  as  a  priest, 
consists  in  offering  sacrifice,  with  the  performance  of  those 
things,  which  did  necessarily  precede  and  follow  that  action. 
It  is  of  necessity,  then,  that  he  should  also  have  somewhat  to 
offer  as  a  sacrifice  to  God. 

For  the  other  part  of  our  inquiry,  viz.  What  it  was  that 
he  sacrificed  ?  I  shall  manifest  in  this  order  of  process  (taking 
leave  to  enlarge  a  little  in  this,  intending  not  so  much  the 
thing,  proved  before,  as  the  manner  of  it). 

1.  He  was  not  to  offer  any  sacrifice,  that  any  priest  had 
offered  before,  by  God's  appointment. 

2.  He  did  not  actually  offer  any  such  sacrifice. 

3.  I  shall  shew  positively  what  he  did  offer. 

1.  He  was  not  to  offer  any  sacrifice  that  the  priests  of  old 
had  appointed  for  them  to  offer.  He  came  to  do  another 
manner  of  work,  than  could  be  brought  about  with  the  blood 
of  bulls  and  goats.  It  cost  more  to  redeem  our  souls.  That 
which  was  of  more  worth  in  itself,  of  nearer  concernment  to 
him  that  offered  it,  of  a  more  manifold  alliance  to  them  for 
whom  it  was  offered,  and  of  better  acceptation  with  God  to 
whom  it  was  offered,  was  to  be  his  sacrifice.  This  is  the 
aim  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  Heb.  x.  1—7.  'For  the  law,'  &c. 

This  is  the  sum  of  the  apostle's  discourse  ;  the  sacrifices 
instituted  by  the  law,  could  not  effect,  nor  work  that  which 


32  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

Christ  our  High  Priest  was  to  accomplish  by  his  sacrifice ; 
and  therefore  he  was  not  to  offer  them  ;  but  they  were  to  be 
abolished,  and  something  else  to  be  brought  in  that  might 
supply  their  room  and  defect. 

What  was  wanting  in  these  sacrifices,  the  apostle  ascribes 
to  the  law,  whereby  they  were  instituted.  The  law  could 
not  do  it,  that  is,  the  ceremonial  law  could  not  do  it.  The 
law  which  instituted  and  appointed  these  sacrifices,  could 
not  accomplish  that  end  of  the  institution,  by  them.  And 
with  this  expression  of  it  he  subjoins  a  reason  of  this  weak- 
ness of  the  law.  '  It  had  a'shadow  of  good  things  to  come, 
and  not  the  very  image  of  the  things  themselves.'  An  ob- 
scure representation  of  those  good  things,  which,  when  they 
were  instituted  and  in  force,  were  julAXovra  to  come,  though 
now  actually  exhibited,  and  existent :  that  is,  Jesus  Christ 
himself,  and  the  good  things  of  the  gospel  accompanying  of 
him.  It  had  but  a  shadow  of  these  things,  not  the  image  ; 
that  is,  the  substance  of  them ;  for  so  I  had  rather  under- 
stand image  here  substantially ;  as  that  may  be  called  the 
image  of  a  picture,  by  which  it  is  drawn  ;  than  to  make  o-jcta 
and  aiKwv  here  to  differ  but  gradually,  as  the  first  rude  shape 
and  proportion,  and  the  perfect  limning  of  any  thing  do. 
The  reason  then  why  all  the  solemn,  operous,  burdensome 
service  of  old,  could  not  (of  itself)  take  away  sin,  is  be- 
cause it  did  not  contain  Christ  in  it,  but  only  had  a  shadow 
of  him. 

2.  The  apostle  instances  in  particular,  by  what  means  the 
law  could  not  do  this  great  work,  of  '  making  the  comers 
thereunto  perfect.'  Touc  tt poaepxo iJ.lv ovg,  that  is,  those  who 
come  to  God  by  it,  the  worshippers ;  which  is  spoke  in  op- 
position to  what  is  said  of  Christ ;  chap.  vii.  25.  '  He  is  able 
to  save  to  the  uttermost  roue  Trporrepxoiuiivovt;,  those  that  come 
to  God  by  him.'  The  word  expresseth  any  man  under  the 
consideration  of  one  coming  to  God  for  acceptation.  As 
Heb.  xi.  6.  '  He  that  cometh  unto  God'  Set  tov  Trpoaepxofxevov 
these  it  could  not  make  perfect ;  that  is,  it  could  not  per- 
fectly atone  God,  and  take  away  their  sins,  so  that  the  con- 
science should  no  more  be  troubled,  nor  tormented  with  the 
guilt  of  sin,  as  ver.  2. 4.  By  what  could  not  the  law  do  this  ? 
By  those  sacrifices  which  it  offered  year  by  year  continually. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  33 

Not  to  speak  of  sacrifices  in  general.  The  sacrifices  of 
the  Jews  may  be  referred  to  four  heads. 

1.  The  daily  sacrifice  of  morning  and  evening,  which  is 
instituted  Exod.  xxix.  38,  39.  which  being  omitted,  was  re- 
newed by  Nehem.  x.  33.  And  wholly  taken  away  for  a 
long  season  by  Antiochus,  according  to  the  prophecy  of  Da- 
niel, Dan.  xi.  31.  this  is  the  juge  sacrijicimn  typifying  Christ's 
constant  presence  with  his  church,  in  the  benefit  of  his  death 
always. 

2.  Voluntary  and  occasional,  which  had  no  prefixed  time, 
nor  matter ;  so  that  they  were  of  such  creatures  as  God  had 
allowed  to  be  sacrificed,  they  were  left  to  the  will  of  the  of- 
ferer, according  as  occasion  and  necessity  was  by  providence 
administered.  Now  of  these  sacrifices  there  was  a  peculiar 
reason,  that  did  not  (as  far  as  I  can  find)  belong  unto  any 
of  the  rest.  The  judicial  government  of  that  nation  being  as 
their  own  historian  Josephus  calls  it,  QeoKparia,  and  imme- 
diately in  the  hand  of  God.  He  appointed  these  voluntary 
sacrifices,  which  were  a  part  of  his  religious  worship,  to  have 
a  place  al-o  in  the  judicial  government  of  the  people.  For 
whereas  he  had  appointed  death  to  be  the  punishment  due  to 
every  sin ;  he  allowed  that  for  many  sins  sacrifice  should 
be  offered,  for  the  expiating  of  the  guilt  contracted  in  that 
commonwealth,  of  which  himself  was  the  governor.  Thus 
for  many  sins  of  ignorance  and  weakness,  and  other  perver- 
sities, sacrifice  was  offered,  and  the  guilty  person  died  not, 
according  to  the  general  tenor  of  the  law,  '  Cursed  is  every 
one  that  continueth  not  in  all  these  things.'  Hence'^  David 
in'his  great  sin  of  murder  and  adultery  flies  to  mere  mercy ; 
acknowledging  that  God  had  appointed  no  sacrifice  for  the 
expiation  of  those  sins,  as  to  the  guilt  political,  contracted 
in  that  commonwealth,  though  otherwise,  no  sins  nor  sinners 
were  excluded  from  the  benefit  of  sacrifices.  This  was  their 
political  regard,  which  they  had,  or  could  have  only  on  this 
account ;  that  God  was  the  supreme  political  governor  of 
that  people,  their  Lord,  and  King. 

3  Sacrifices  extraordinary  on  solemn  occasions  :  which 
seem  some  of  them  to  be  mixed  of  the  two  former  kinds ; 
stated  and  voluntary.  Such  was  Solomon's  great  sacrifice 
at  the  dedication  of  the  temple.     These  partly  answered 

«^  Psal.  li.  16. 


34  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

the  sacrifice  instituted  at  the  dedication  of  the  altar  and  ta- 
bernacle, partly  the  free-will  offerings,  which  God  allowed 
the  people,  according  to  their  occasions ;  and  appointed 
them  for  them. 

4.  Appointed  sacrifices  on  solemn  days:  as  on  the  sab- 
bath, new  moons,  passover,  feast  of  weeks,  lesser  and  greater 
jubilee,  but  especially  the  solemn  anniversary  sacrifice  of  ex- 
piation, when  the  high-priest  entered  into  the  holy  place, 
with  the  blood  of  the  beast  sacrificed,  on  the  tenth  day  of 
the  month  Tizri.  The  institution  of  this  sacrifice  you  have 
Lev.  xvi.  throughout.  The  matter  of  it  was  one  bullock, 
and  two  goats,  or  kids  of  goats,  ver.  2.  5.  The  manner  was 
this,  1.  In  the  entrance 'Aaron  offered  one  bullock  peculiarly 
for  himself  and  his  house  ;'  ver.  6.  2.  Lots  were  cast  on  the 
two  goats,  one  to  be  a  sin-offering,  the  other  to  be  Azazel, 
ver.  8,  9.  3.  The  bullock  and  goat  being  slain,  the  blood 
was  carried  into  the  holy  place.  4.  Azazel  having  all  the 
sins  of  the  people  confessed  over  him,  was  sent  into  the  wil- 
derness to  perish;  ver.  21.  5.  The  end  of  this  sacrifice 
was  atonement  and  cleansing,  ver.  30.  Of  the  whole  nature, 
ends,  significancy,  and  use,  of  this  sacrifice  (as  of  others), 
elsewhere ;  at  present,  I  attend  only  the  thesis  proposed. 

Now  if  perfect  atonement  and  expiation  might  be  ex- 
pected from  any  of  the  sacrifices  so  instituted  by  God,  cer- 
tainly it  might  be  from  this  ;  therefore  this  doth  the  apostle 
choose  to  instance  in.  This  was  the  sacrifice  offered  kot' 
tviavTov,  and  tic  to  Strjvticsc  '  but  these,  saith  he,  could  not  do 
it;  the  law  by  them  could  not  do  it,  and  this  he  proves  with 
two  arguments. 

L  From  the  event,  ver.  2,  3.  *  For  then  would  they  not 
have  ceased  to  be  offered ;  because  that  the  worshipper  once 
purged,  should  have  had  no  more  conscience  of  sin?  But  in 
these  sacrifices,  there  was  a  remembrance  made  again  of  sins 
every  year.'  The  words  of  the  second  verse  are  to  be  read 
with  an  interrogation,  conclusive  in  the  negative  :  would 
they  not  have  ceased  to  have  been  offered  ?  That  is  cer- 
tainly they  would ;  and  because  they  did  not  do  so,  it  is 
evident  from  the  event,  that  they  could  not  take  away  sin. 
In  most  copies  the  words  are,  IttI  av  eTravrravTo  ^po(T(f>£p6iu£vat. 
Those  that  add  the  negative  particle  ovk,  put  it  for  ovx',  as 
it  is  frequently  used. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  35 

2.  From  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  ver.  4.  *  For  it  was 
not  possible,  that  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  should  take 
away  sin.'  The  reason  in  these  words  is  evident  and  plain, 
especially  that  of  ver.  4.  There  is  a  twofold  impossibility  in 
the  thing. 

1.  In  regard  of  impetration  ;  it  was  impossible  they 
should  really  atone  God,  who  was  provoked.  First,  The  con- 
junction between  the  sinner  and  the  sacrificed  beast,  was 
not  such,  or  so  near  (being  only  that  of  possessor  and  pos- 
sessed), that  really  and  beyond  representation  and  type,  the 
blood  of  the  one  could  satisfy  for  the  sin  of  the  other.  Much 
less,  secondly,  was  there  an  innate  worth  of  the  blood  of  any 
beast,  though  never  so  innocent,  to  atone  the  justice  of  God, 
that  was  offended  at  sin;  Mich.  vi.  6,  7.  Nor  thirdly,  was 
there  any  will  in  them  for  such  an  undertaking,  or  commu- 
tation. The  sacrifice  was  bound  with  cords  to  the  horns  of 
the  altar  ;  Christ  went  willingly  to  the  sacrifice  of  himself. 

2.  In  regard  of  application.  The  blood  of  common  sa- 
crifices being  once  shed,  was  a  dead  thing,  and  had  no  more 
worth  nor  efficacy  :  it  could  not  possibly  be  a  living  way 
for  us  to  come  to  God  by ;  nor  could  it  be  preserved,  to  be 
sprinkled  upon  the  conscience  of  the  sinner. 

Hence  doth  the  apostle  make  it  evident,  in  the  first  place, 
that  Christ  was  not  to  offer  any  of  the  sacrifices  which  for- 
mer priests  had  offered,  because  it  was  utterly  impossible, 
that  by  such  sacrifices,  the  end  of  the  sacrifice  which  he  was 
to  offer,  should  be  accomplished.     This  also  he  proves, 

2.  Because  God  had  expressly  disallowed  of  those  sacri- 
fices, as  to  that  end  ;  not  only  it  was  impossible  in  the  nature 
of  the  thing  itself,  but  also  God  had  absolutely  rejected  the 
tender  of  them,  as  to  the  taking  away  sin,  and  bringing  sin- 
ners to  God.  But  it  may  be  said,  did  not  God  appoint  them 
for  that  end  and  purpose,  as  was  spoken  before ;  the  end  of 
the  sacrifice  in  the  day  of  expiation  was  (Lev,  xvi.  30.)  to 
atone,  and  cleanse  ;  *  on  that  day  shall  the  priest  make  an 
atonement  for  you  to  cleanse  you'  (for  the  priest  made  an 
atonement  actively,  by  offering  the  sacrifice :  the  sacrifice 
itself  passively,  by  undergoing  the  penalty  of  death  ;  Christ, 
who  was  both  priest  and  sacrifice,  did  both).  I  answer ;  they 
were  never  appointed  of  God  for  to  accomplish  that  end,  by 
any  real  worth  and  efficacy  of  their  own,  but  merely  to  ty- 


36  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

pify,  prefigure,  and  point  out  him,  and  that;  which  did  the 
work,  which  they  represented  ;  and  so  served  as  the  apostle 
speaks,  until  the  time  of  reformation;  Heb.  ix.  10.  they 
served  the  use  of  that  people,  in  the  under-age  condition, 
wherein  God  was  pleased  to  keep  them. 

But  now  that  God  rejected  them  as  to  this  end  and  pur- 
pose, the  apostle  proves  by  the  testimony  of  David,  speak- 
ing of  the  acceptance  of  Christ,  Psal.  xl.  6,  7.  '  Sacrifice 
and  offering  thou  didst  not  desire ;  mine  ears  hast  thou  open- 
ed ;  burnt-offering-,  and  sin-offering  hast  thou  not  required. 
Then  said  I,  Lo  I  come/  &c.  which  the  apostle  insists  on, 
ver.  6 — 9.  There  are  several  accounts,  upon  which  God  in 
Scripture  is  said  to  disregard,  and  not  to  approve  or  accept 
of  sacrifices,  which  yet  were  of  his  own  institution.  1.  In 
respect  of  the  hypocrisy  of  the  offerers  :  that  people  being 
grown  formal  and  corrupt,  trusted  in  sacrifices,  and  the  work 
wrought  in  them,  and  said  by  them,  they  should  be  justified; 
God  expressing  his  indignation  against  such  sacrifices,  or 
the  sacrifices  of  such  persons,  rejects  the  things  themselves 
wherein  they  trusted,  that  is,  in  reference  to  them  that  used 
them.  This  is  the  intention  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  Isa.  i.  12, 
13.  but  this  is  not  the  cause  of  their  rejection  in  this  place 
of  the  psalmist ;  for  he  speaketh  of  them  who  walketh  with 
God  in  uprightness,  and  waited  for  his  salvation ;  even  of 
himself  and  other  saints,  as  appears  in  the  context,  ver.  5. 
&c.  2.  Comparatively;  they  are  rejected  as  to  the  outward 
work  of  them,  in  comparison  of  his  more  spiritual  worship; 
as  Psal.  1.  12 — 14.  but  neither  are  they  here  rejected  on  that 
account ;  nor  is  there  mention  of  any  opposition  between 
the  outward  worship  of  sacrifice,  and  any  other  more  spi- 
ritual and  internal  part  thereof :  but  between  sacrifice,  and  the 
boring  of  the  ear,  or  preparing  of  the  body  of  Christ,  as  ex- 
pressly, ver.  6. 

Their  rejection  then  here  mentioned,  is,  in  reference  to 
that  which  is  asserted,  in  opposition  to  them,  and  in  refer- 
ence to  the  end,  for  which  that  is  asserted  :  look  to  what 
end  Christ  had  a  body  fitted  and  prepared  for,  and  to  that 
end,  and  the  compassing  of  it,  are  all  sacrifices  rejected  of 
God  :  now  this  was  to  take  away  sin,  so  that  as  to  thate  nd 
are  they  rejected. 

And  here  in  our  passage  may  we  remove  what  the  Raco- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  37 

vian  catechism  gives  us,  as  the  difference  between  the  expi- 
ation under  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  under  the  New, 
concerning  which.  Chap,  de  Mun.  Ch.  Sacerdot.  q.  5.  they 
thus  inquire. 

'  Q.  Whaf*  is  the  difference  between  the  expiation  of  sin 
in  the  Old  and  New  Testament? 

*A.  The  expiation  of  sins  under  the  New  Testament,  is  not 
only  much  different  from  that  under  the  Old,  but  also  is  far 
better,  and  more  excellent:  and  that  chiefly  for  two  causes: 
the  first  is,  that  under  the  Old  Testament,  expiation  by  those 
legal  sacrifices  was  appointed  only  for  those  sins,  which 
happened  upon  imprudence  and  infirmity ;  from  whence 
they  were  also  called  infirmities  and  ignorances.  But  for 
greater  sins,  such  as  were  manifest  transgressions  of  the  com- 
mand of  God,  there  were  no  sacrifices  instituted,  but  the  pu- 
nishment of  death  was  proposed  to  them :  and  if  God  did 
forgive  such  to  any,  he  did  not  do  it  by  virtue  of  the  cove- 
nant, but  of  singular  mercy,  which  God  besides  the  covenant 
did  afford,  when,  and  to  whom  he  would  :  but  under  the  new 
covenant,  not  only  those  sins  are  expiated,  which  happen  by 
imprudence  and  infirmity,  but  those  also,  which  are  trans- 
gressions of  most  evident  commands  of  God,  whilst  he  who 
happened  so  to  fall,  doth  not  continue  therein,  but  is  changed 
by  true  repentance,  and  falleth  not  into  that  sin  again.  The 
latter  cause  is,  because  under  the  Old  Testament,  expi- 
ation of  sins  was  so  performed,  that  only  temporal  punish- 
ment was  taken  away  from  them,  whose  sins  were  expiated. 
But  under  the  New,  the  expiation  is  such,  as  not  only  takes 

^  Quodnara  est  discrimen  inter  veteris,  et  novi  fcEdciis  peccatoruni  expiationera  ? 
— Expiatio  peccatoruni  sub  novo  foedere.non  solum  distat  ab  expiatione  peccatorum 
sub  vetereplurimuni,  veruin  etiam  longe  praestantior,  et  excelleiitior  est:  id  vero  du- 
abus  potissirauni  de  causis  :  prior  est,  quod  sub  vetere  foedere,  iis  tantum  peccatis 
expiatio,  per  ilia  legalia  sacrificia,  constituta  fuit,  quse  per  imprudentiani,  vel  per 
infirniitatem  admissa  fuere,  uiide  etiam  infirmitates,  et  ignorantia;  nuncupabantur  : 
verum  pro  peccatis  gravioribus,  qua;  transgressiones  erant  mandati  Uei  nianifestae, 
nulla  sacrificia  institutafuerant,  sed  mortis  prena  fuit  proposita.  Quod  si  talia  Deus 
alicui  condonabat,  id  non  vi  foederis  fiebat,  sed  misericordia  Dei  singulari,  quam 
Deuscitrafoedus,etquando,etcuilibuitexhibebat:  sub  novo  vero  focdcre  pcccataex- 
piantur,  non  solum  per  imprudentiani  et  infirniitatem  admissa,  verum  etiam  ea,  qua3 
apertissiniorum  Dei  mandatorura  sunt  transgressiones,  dummodo  is  cui  labi  ad  eum 
moduracontigerit,in  eo  non  perseverct;  verum  per  veram  panitentiam  resipiscat,  nee 
ad  illud  peccatum  amplius  relabatur.  Posterior  vero  causa  est,  quod  sub  prisco  foe- 
dere ad  eum  niodum  peccatorum  expiatio  peragebatur,  ut  poena  temporaria  tantum, 
ab  iis,  quorum  peccata  expiabantur,  toUeretur :  sub  novo  vero  ea  est  expiatio,  ut 
non  solum  pcenas  temporarias,  verum  etiam  aeternas  amoveat,  et  loco  poenarum,  aeter- 
nam  vitam  in  foedere  promissam,  iis  (luorum  peccata  fuerint  expiata  offerat.  De 
Mun.  Ch.  Sacerdot.  Q.  5, 


38  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

away  temporal,  but  eternal  punishment,  and  in  their  stead, 
offers  eternal  life  promised  in  the  covenant,  to  them  whose 
sins  are  expiated.'  Thus  they. 

Some  brief  animadversions  will  give  the  reader  a  clear 
account  of  this  discourse.  1.  Sundry  things  are  here  splen- 
didly supposed  by  our  catechists,  than  which  nothing  could 
be  imagined  or  invented  more  false  :  as  1.  That  the  covenant 
was  not  the  same  for  substance  under  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament, before  and  after  the  coming  of  Christ  in  the  flesh. 
2.  That  those  under  the  Old  Testament  were  not  pardoned 
or  saved  by  Christ.  3.  That  death  temporal  was  all  that 
was  threatened  by  the  law.  4.  That  God  forgave  sin,  and 
not  in,  or  by  the  covenant.  5.  That  there  were  no  promises 
of  eternal  life  under  the  Old  Testament,  &c.  on  these  and 
the  like  goodly  principles,  is  this  whole  discourse  erected  ; 
let  us  now  consider  their  assertions.     The  first  is, 

1 .  That  expiation  by  legal  sacrifices  was  only  for  some 
sins  and  not  of  all ;  as  sins  of  infirmity  and  ignorance,  not 
great  crimes  :  wherein,  l.They  suppose,  that  the  legal  sacri- 
fices did  by  themselves,  and  their  own  efficacy,  expiate  sin, 
which  is  directly  contrary  to  the  discourse  of  the  apostle 
now  insisted  on.  2.  Their  affirmation  hereon  is  most  false  : 
Aaron  making  an  atonement  for  sin,  confessed  over  the 
goat  all  the  iniquities  of  the  children  of  Israel,  and  all  their 
transgressions,  in  all  their  sins;  Lev.  xvi.  21.  and  besides, 
all  manner  of  sins  are  comprised  under  those  expressions  of 
ignorances  and  infirmities. 

2.  They  say,  *  for  greater  sins  there  was  then  no  expiation, 
but  death  was  threatened  to  them.'  But  then,  1,  None  that 
ever  committed  such  sins  were  saved  ;  for  without  expiation 
there  is  no  salvation.  2.  Death  was  threatened,  and  inflicted 
without  mercy  for  some  sins,  as  the  law  with  its  judicial  ad- 
ditaments  was  the  rule  of  the  judaical  polity  ;  and  for  those 
sins,  there  was  no  sacrifice  for  a  deliverance  from  death  tem- 
poral ;  but  death  was  threatened  to  every  sin,  small  and 
great,  as  the  law  was  a  rule  of  moral  obedience  unto  God ; 
and  so  in  respect  of  sacrifices  there  was  no  distinction.  This 
difference  of  sacrifices  for  some  sins,  and  not  for  others  in 
particular,  did  depend  merely  on  their  use  by  God's  appoint- 
ment in  the  commonwealth  of  that  people,  and  had  no  re- 
gard to  the  spiritual  expiation  of  sin,  which  they  typified. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST.  39 

3.  That  God  forgave  the  sins  of  his  people  of  old,  by  sin- 
gular mercy,  and  not  by  virtue  of  his  covenant,  is  a  bold  fig- 
ment. God  exercises  no  singular  mercy,  but  in  the  covenant 
thereof;  Eph.  ii.  12. 

4.  Their  condition  of  expiation  (by  the  way)  under  the 
New  Testament,  that  the  sinner  fall  not  again  into  the  same 
sin,  is  a  matter  that  these  men  understand  not ;  but  this  is 
no  place  to  discuss  it. 

5.  That  the  expiation  under  the  Old  Testament  reached 
only  to  the  removal  of  temporal  punishment,  is  another  ima- 
gination of  our  catechists.  It  was  death  eternal  that  was 
threatened,  as  the  punishment  due.  to  the  transgression  of 
the  law,  as  it  was  the  rule  of  obedience  to  God,  as  hath  been 
proved  ;  even  the  death  that  Christ  delivered  us  from  ;  Rom. 
V.  12,  &c.  Heb.  ii.  14,  15.  God  was  atoned  by  those  sacri- 
fices, according  to  their  way  of  making  atonement.  Lev. 
xvi.  30.  so  that  the  punishment  avoided  was  eternal  punish- 
ment. 2.  Neither  is  this  indeed  spoken  by  our  catechists, 
as  though  they  believed  any  punishment  should  be  eternal; 
but  they  only  hide  themselves  in  ambiguity  of  the  expression, 
it  being  annihilation  they  intend  thereby.  3.  The  irpwrov 
xpevBog  of  this  discourse  is,  that  expiation  by  sacrifices  was  no 
other,  than  what  was  done  really  by  the  sacrifices  themselves, 
so  everting  their  typical  nature  and  institution,  and  divesting 
them  of  the  efficacy  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  they  did 
represent. 

6.  It  is  confessed,  that  there  is  a  diflference  between  the 
expiation  under  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  under  the  New; 
but  this  of  application  and  manifestation,  not  of  impetration 
and  procurement.  This  is  Jesus  Christ,  *  the  same  yesterday, 
to  day,  and  for  ever.' 

But  they  plead  proof  of  Scripture  for  what  they  say  in 
the  ensuing  question. 

*  Q.  How*  dost  thou  demonstrate  both  these  ? 

'A.  That  the  sins,  which  could  not  be  expiated  under  the 
Old  Testament,  are  all  expiated  under  the  New,  Paul  wit- 
nesseth.  Acts  xiii.  38,  39.  and  the  same  is  also  affirmed  ; 

"  Qua  ralione  vcro  utrunique  deraonstras? — Peccata,  quee  sub  x'etere  foedere  ex- 
plari  lion  potuere  omnia  sub  novo  expiari  tcstatur  Apostolus  Paulus,  in  Actis,  cap. 
xiii.  38,  39.  idem  habetur;  Rom.  iii.  "25.  Heb.  ix.  15.  Quod  vcro  ea  rationc  expi- 
ciitur  peccata  sub  novo  fodere,  ut  etiam  asterna  f  cena  amoveatur,  et  vita  aetcrna  do- 
uetur,  habetur  Heb.  ix.  12.  ubi  sup.  Q.  6. 


40  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST- 

Rom.  iii.  25.  Heb.  ix.  15.  But  that  sins  are  so  expiated 
under  the  New  Testament,  as  that  also  eternal  punishment 
is  removed,  and  life  eternal  given,  we  have  Heb.  ix.  12.' 

This  work  will  speedily  be  at  an  issue.  1.  It  is  denied, 
that  Paul,  Acts  xiii.  38,  39.  makes  a  distinction  of  sins, 
whereof  some  might  be  expiated  by  Moses'  law,  and  others 
not.  He  says  no  ttiore  there,  than  in  this  place  to  the  He- 
brews, namely,  that  the  legal  sacrifices,  wherein  they  rested 
and  trusted,  could,not  of  themselves  free  them,  or  their  con- 
sciences from  sin,  or  give  them  peace  with  God;  being  but 
types  and  shadows  of  good  things  to  come  ;  the  body  being 
Christ,  by  whom  alone  all  justification  from  sin  is  to  be  ob- 
tained. Absolutely,  the  sacrifices  of  the  law  expiated  no  sin, 
and  so  were  they  rested  in  by  the  Jews.  Typically,  they  ex- 
piated all,  and  so  Paul  calls  them  from  them  to  the  antitype 
(or  rather  thing  typified)  now  actually  exhibited. 

2.  The  two  next  places  of  Rom.  iii.  25.  Heb.  ix.  15.  do 
expressly  condemn  the  figment  they  strive  to  establish  by 
them  ;  both  of  them  assigning  the  pardon  of  sins  that  were 
past,  and  their  expiation,  imto  the  blood  and  sacrifice  of 
Christ;  though  there  were  then  purifications,  purgations, 
sacrifices,  yet  the  meritorious,  and  efficient  cause  of  all  ex- 
piation, was  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  manifests  the  expia- 
tion under  the  Old  and  New  Testament  for  substance  to  have 
been  the  same. 

3.  That  the  expiation  under  the  New  Testament  is  ac- 
companied with  deliverance  from  eternal  punishment,  and  a 
grant  of  life  eternal,  is  confessed  ;  and  so  also  was  that 
under  the  Old,  or  it  was  no  expiation  at  all,  that  had  respect 
either  to  God,  or  the  souls  of  men  :  but  to  proceed  with  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ. 

This  is  the  first  thing  I  proposed,  Christ  being  to  offer 
sacrifice,  was  not  to  offer  the  sacrifice  of  the  priests  of  old ; 
because  they  could  never  bring  about  what  he  aimed  at  in 
his  sacrifice  ;  it  was  impossible  in  the  nature  of  the  thing  it- 
self, and  they  were  expressly,  as  to  that  end,  rejected  of  God 
himself. 

2.  Christ  as  a  priest  did  never  offer  these  sacrifices  ;  it 
is  true,  as  one  made  under  the  law,  and  whom  it  became  to 
fulfil  all  righteousness,  he  was  present  at  them :  but  as  a 
priest  he  never  offered  them ;  for  the  apostle  expressly  af- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  41 

firms,  that  he  could  not  be  a  priest,  that  had  right  to  offer 
those  sacrifices,  as  before  ;  and  he  positively  refuses  the 
owning  himself  for  such  a  priest,  when  having  cured  the 
leprous  man,  he  bade  him  go  shew  himself  to  the  priest  ac- 
cording to  the  law. 

3.  What  Christ  did  offer  indeed,  as  his  sacrifice,  is  nextly 
mentioned.  This  the  apostle  expresseth  in  that  which  is 
asserted,  in  opposition  to  the  sacrifices  rejected  ;  Heb.  x.  5. 
*  But  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me.' 

The  words  in  the  psalm  are  in  the  sound  of  them  other- 
wise, Psal.  xl.  6.  >b  nnj  CD'im  '  mine  ears  hast  thou  digged:' 
which  the  Septuagint  render,  and  the  apostle  from  them, 
atjfxa  KaraprtCTw  fxol ;  *  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me.'  Of  the 
accomodation  of  the  interpretation  to  the  original,  there  is 
much  contention;  some  think  here  is  an  allusion  to  the  cus- 
tom among  the  Jews,  of  boring  the  ear  of  him,  who  was  upon 
his  own  consent  to  be  a  servant  for  ever.  Now  because  Christ 
took  a  body  to  be  obedient,  and  a  servant  to  his  Father,  this 
is  expressed  by  the  boring  of  the  ear,  which  therefore  the 
Septuagint  renders  by  preparing  a  body,  wherein  he  might 
be  so  obedient ;  but  this  to  me  seems  too  curious  on  the 
part  of  the  allusion,  and  too  much  strained  on  the  part  of 
the  application,  and  therefore  I  shall  not  insist  on  it. 

Plainly,  mD  signifies  not  only  in  its  first  sense  to  'dig,' 
but  also  to  '  prepare,'  and  is  so  rendered  by  the  Septuagint ; 
now,  whereas  the  original  expresseth  only  the  ears,  which 
are  the  organ  by  which  we  hear,  and  become  obedient 
(whence  to  hear  is  sometimes  as  much  as  to  be  obedient),  it 
mentions  the  ear  synecdochically,  for  the  whole  body, 
which  God  so  prepared  for  obedience  to  himself:  and  that 
which  the  original  expressed  synecdochically,  the  Sep- 
tuagint, and  after  them  the  apostle  rendered  more  plainly 
and  fully,  naming  the  whole  body  wherein  he  obeyed,  when 
the  ears  were  only  expressed,  whereby  he  learned  obedi- 
ence. 

The  interpretation  of  this  place  by  the  Socinians,  is  as 
ridiculous  as  any  they  make  use  of;  take  it  in  the  words  of 
Volkelius.     *■' Add  hereto  that  the  mortal  body  of  Christ, 

f  Ailde  quod  corpus  uiortale,  quo  Christus  ante  mortem,  imo  ante  suum  in  coe- 
him  asccnsuni  prfeditus  erat,  ad  hoc  baccrdotiuni  obeundum,  ct  sacrificiura  penitus 
absolvendum,  apluni  non  fuit ;  idcoque  tunc  dcmum  corpus,  liuic  rci  accoumioda 

VOL.    IX.  E 


42  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

which  he  had  before  his  death,  yea,  before  his  ascension  inta. 
heaven,  was  not  fit  for  his  undergoing  this  office  of  priest- 
hood, or  wholly  to  accomplish  the  sacrifice  :  wherefore  the 
divine  writer  to  the  Hebrews,  chap.x.  5.  declareth,  that  then 
he  had  a  perfect  body,  accommodated  unto  this  work,  when 
he  went  into  the  world  ;  that  is,  to  come,  which  is  heaven.' 
A  heap  of  foolish  abominations.  1.  The  truth  is,  no  body 
but  a  mortal  body  was  fit  to  be  this  sacrifice,  which  was  to 
be  accomplislied,  according  to  all  the  types  of  it,  by  shed- 
ding of  blood,  without  which  there  is  no  remission.  2.  It 
is  false,  that  Christ  had  a  mortal  body  after  his  resurrection  ; 
or  that  he  hath  any  other  body  now  in  heaven,  than  what 
he  rose  withal.  3.  It  is  false  that  the  world,  spoken  of 
simply,  doth  any  where  signify  the  world  to  come,  or  that 
the  world  here  signifies  heaven.  4.  It  is  false  that  the 
coming  into  the  world,  signifies  going  out  of  the  world  :  as 
it  is  here  interpreted.  5.  Christ's  bringing  into  the  world, 
was  by  his  incarnation  and  birth,  Heb.  i.  6.  according  to 
the  constant  use  of  that  expression  in  the  Scripture,  as  his 
ascension  is  his  leaving  the  world,  and  going  to  his  Father, 
John  xiii.  1.  xiv.  19.  xvi.  28. 

But  I  must  not  insist  on  this;  it  is  the  body  that  God 
prepared  Christ  for  his  obedience,  that  is,  his  whole  human 
nature  that  is  asserted  for  the  matter  of  Christ's  offering. 
For  the  clearing  whereof  the  reader  may  observe,  that  the 
matter  of  the  offering  and  sacrifice  of  Christ  is  expressed 
three  ways. 

1.  It  is  said  to  be  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  Heb. 
X.  10.  The  offering  of  the  body  of  Jesus,  and  the  blood  of 
Christ,  is  said  to  spurge  us  from  our  sins,  that  is,  by  the 
sacrifice  of  it ;  and  in  his  blood  have  we  redemption,  and  by 
his  own  *  blood  did  he  enter  into  the  holy  place,'  Heb.  ix. 
12.  and  most  expressly,  xiii.  12. 

2.  His  soul;  Isa.  liii.  10.  'When  thou  shalt  make  his 
soul  an  offering  for  sin.' 

3.  It  is  most  frequently  said  to  be  himself  that  was  of- 
fered. Eph.  V.  2.  Heb.  i.  3.  ix.  14.  25,  26.  vii.  27.  Hence 
it  appears  what  was  the  matter  of  the  sacrifice  of  this  High 

tuni,  iierfectum  eifuisse,  divinus  Aullior  indicat,  Heb.  x.  5.  ciim  in  munduii),  nen)|)e 
fiitunim  illam,  qui  cceIuid  est,  iiigrcderetur.     A''olkel.  de  vera  Relig.  lib.  3.  cap.  37. 


dc  Sac.  Cbristi.  p.  146. 


1  Joliii  i.  7,     Ephes.  i.  13. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  43 

Priest,  even  himself;  he  sacrificed  himself;  his  whole  human 
nature ;  he  offered  up  his  body  and  soul,  as  a  propitiatory- 
sacrifice  to  God  ;  a  sacrifice  for  atonement  and  expiation. 

Farther,  to  clear  this,  I  must  desire  the  reader  to  take 
notice  of  the  import  of  this  expression  ;  '  He  sacrificed  him- 
self/ or  Christ  sacrificed  himself.  *  He'  in  the  first  place,  as 
it  is  spoken  of  the  sacrificer,  denotes  the  person  of  Christ, 
and  both  natures  herein  ;  '  himself,'  as  the  sacrificed,  is  only 
the  human  nature  of  Christ,  wherein  and  whereof  that  sacri- 
fice was  made.  He  makes  the  atonement  actively,  as  the 
priest;  himself  passively,  as  the  sacrifice. 

1 .  *  He'  is  the  person  of  Christ,  God  and  man  jointly  and 
distinctly  acting  in  the  work. 

1.  As  God  ;  Heb.  ix.  14.  '  through  the  eternal  Spirit  he 
offered  himself  to  God.'  His  eternal  Spirit,  or  Deity,  was 
the  principal  agent,  offering;  and  wherever  there  is  men- 
tioning of  Christ's  offering  himself,  it  relates  principally  to 
the  person,  God-man,  who  offered. 

2.  The  free  will  of  his  human  nature  was  in  it  also  ;  so 
Heb.  X.  7.  '  Lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will ;'  when  God  had  pre- 
pared him  a  body,  opened  his  hears,  he  says/Lo,  I  come  to 
do  thy  will ;'  as  it  was  written  of  him  in  the  volume  of  God's 
book ;  and  that  this  expression,  *  Lo,  1  come  to  do  thy  will,' 
sets  out  the  readiness  of  the  human  will  of  Christ,  is  evident 
from  that  exposition  which  is  given  of  it,  Psal.  xl.  8.  '  yea 
thy  law  is  within  my  heart,'  or  in  the  'midst  of  my  bowels;' 
thy  law,  the  law  of  the  Mediator,  that  I  am  to  undertake,  it 
is  in  the  midst  of  my  heart ;  which  is  an  expression  of  the 
greatest  readiness  and  willingness  possible.  He  then  that 
offers  is  our  Mediator,  God  and  man  in  one  person ;  and  the 
offering  is  the  act  of  the  person. 

2.  '  Himself  offered,  as  the  matter  of  the  sacrifice,  is  only 
the  human  nature  of  Christ,  soul  and  body,  as  was  said  ; 
which  is  evident  from  the  description  of  a  sacrifice,  what 
it  is. 

A  sacrifice  is  a  religious  oblation,  wherein  something  by 
the  ministry  of  a  priest,  appointed  of  God  thereunto,  is  de- 
dicated to  God  and  destroyed,  as  to  what  it  was,  for  the 
ends  and  purposes  of  spiritual  worship  whereunto  it  is  in- 
stituted. I  shall  only  take  notice  of  that  one  part  of  this 
definition,  which  asserts  that  the  thing  sacrificed  was  to  be 

e2 


44  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

destroyed  as  to  what  it  was.  This  is  clear  from  all  the  sacri- 
fices that  ever  were ;  either  they  were  slain  or  burnt,  or  sent  to 
destruction.  Now  the  person  of  Christ  was  not  dissolved, 
but  the  union  of  his  natures  continued ;  even  then  when 
the  human  nature  was  in  itself  destroyed,  by  the  separation 
of  soul  and  body.  It  was  the  soul  and  body  of  Christ  that 
was  sacrificed ;  his  body  being  killed,  and  his  soul  separated ; 
so  that  at  that  season  it  was  destroyed  as  to  what  it  was; 
though  it  was  impossible  he  should  be  detained  by  death. 

And  this  sacrifice  of  Christ,  was  typified  by  the  two 
goats;  his  body,  whose  blood  was  shed,  by  the  goat  that  was 
slain  visibly ;  and  his  soul  by  Azazel,  on  whose  head  the 
sins  of  the  people  were  confessed,  and  he  is  sent  away  into 
the.  wilderness  to  suffer  there  by  a  fall  or  famishment. 

This  also  will  farther  appear  in  our  following  considera- 
tion of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  a  punishment;  when  I  shall 
shew,  that  he  suffered  both  in  soul  and  body. 

But  it  may  be  said,  if  only  the  human  nature  of  Christ 
was  offered,  how  could  it  be  a  sacrifice  of  such  infinite  value, 
as  to  the  justice  of  God,  for  all  the  sins  of  all  the  elect, 
whereunto  it  was  appointed. 

Am.  Though  the  thing  sacrificed  was  but  finite,  yet  the 
person  sacrificing  was  infinite;  and  the  a-KOTik^aiia  of  the 
action  follows  the  agent ;  that  is,  our  Mediator  S'cavS'jowTroe; 
whence  the  sacrifice  was  of  infinite  value. 

And  this  is  the  second  consideration  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  it  was  a  sacrifice ;  what  is  the  peculiar  influence  of 
his  death  as  a  sacrifice,  into  the  satisfaction  he  hath  made, 
shall  be  declared  afterward. 

From  what  hath  been  spoken,  a  brief  description  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ,  as  to  all  the  concernments  of  it  may  be 
taken. 

1.  The  person  designing,  appointing,  and  instituting  this 
sacrifice,  is  God  the  Father;  as  in  grace  contriving  the  great 
work  of  the  salvation  of  the  elect ;  a  *  body  did  he  prepare 
him;'  and  therein  he  came  to  do  his  will,  Heb.  x.  9.  in  that 
which  he  did,  which  the  sacrifices  of  old  could  not  do.  He 
came  to  fulfil  the  will  of  God,  his  appointment  and  ordi- 
nance, being  his  servant  therein ;  made  jSpo^^u  n  less  than 
the  Father,  that  he  might  be  obedient  to  death  :  God  the 
Father  sent  him  when  he  made  his  soul  an  offering. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  45 

2.  He  to  whom  it  was  offered,  was  God;  God  essentially 
considered,  with  his  glorious  property  of  justice,  which  was 
to  be  atoned  ;  *  he  gave  himself  a  sacrifice  to  God,  for  a 
sweet  smelling  savour;'  Eph.  v.  2.  that  is, to  atone  him  being 
provoked,  as  we  shall  see  afterward, 

3.  The  person  offering  was  Christ  the  Mediator,  God 
and  man;  *  he  offered  himself  to  God;'  Heb.  ix.  14.  And 
because  he  did  it,  who  was  God  and  man,  and  as  God  and 
man,  God  is  said  to  '  redeem  his  church  with  his  own  blood ;' 
Acts  XX.  28. 

4.  The  matter  of  the  sacrifice  was  his  whole  human  na- 
ture, body  and  soul,  called  himself,  as  I  have  shewed,  in 
sundry  particulars. 

5.  The  immediate  efficient  cause  of  his  offering,  and  the 
destruction  of  that  which  he  offered  unto  God,  as  before  de- 
scribed, was  his  own  will :  '  Lo,  I  come,'  saith  he,  *  to  do 
thy  will ;'  and  '  no  man,'  saith  he,  '  taketh  my  life  from  me  ; 
I  lay  down  my  life,  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  up  again  ;* 
John  X.  17,  18.  What  men  or  devils  did  to  him,  as  what  he 
suffered  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  comes  under  another  con- 
sideration, as  his  death  was  a  penalty;  as  it  was  a  sacrifice, 
his  own  will  was  all  the  cause  immediately  effecting  it. 

6.  The  fire  that  was  to  set  this  holocaust  on  a  flame,  was 
the  Holy  Spirit;  Heb.  ix.  14.  Through  the  eternal  Spirit; 
that  the  fire  which  came  down  from  heaven,  and  was  always 
kept  alive  upon  the  altar,  was  a  type  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
might  easily  be  demonstrated.  I  have  done  it  elsewhere. 
Now  the  Holy  Spirit  did  this  in  Christ;  he  was  offered 
through  the  eternal  Spirit ;  as  others  were  by  fire. 

7.  The  Scripture  speaks  nothing  of  the  altar,  on  which 
Christ  was  offered.  Some  assign  the  cross.  That  of  our 
Saviour  is  abundantly  sufficient  to  evince  the  folly  thereof; 
Matt,  xxiii.  18,  19.  If  the  cross  was  the  altar,  it  was  greater 
than  Christ,  and  sanctified  him,  which  is  blasphemy.  Be- 
sides, Christ  himself  is  said  to  be  an  altar;  Heb.  xiii.  10.  and 
he  is  said  to  sanctify  himself  to  be  an  offering  or  a  sacrifice; 
John  xviii.  19.  So  that  indeed  the  Deity  of  Christ,  that  sup- 
ported, bore  up,  and  sanctified  the  human  nature  as  offered, 
was  the  altar  ;  and  the  cross  was  but  an  instrument  of  the 
cruelty  of  man,  that  taketh  place  in  the  deatli  of  Christ  as 
it  was  a  penalty,  but  hath  no  place  in  it  as  a  sacrifice. 


46  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

That  this  sacrifice  of  Christ  was  a  sacrifice  of  propitia- 
tion, as  made  by  blood,  as  answering  the  typical  sacrifices 
of  old ;  that  the  end  and  effect  of  it  was  atonement  or  recon- 
ciliation, shall  elsewhere  be  more  fully  manifested  :  the  dis- 
covery of  it  also  will  in  part  be  made,  by  what  in  the  en- 
suing discourse  shall  be  spoken  about  reconciliation  itself. 


CHAP.  XXIII. 

Of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  punishment,  and  the 
satisfaction  made  thereby. 

So  is  the  death  of  Christ  revealed  as  a  price,  and  a  sacri- 
fice :  what  are  the  proper  effects  of  it,  under  these  consi- 
derations, shall  be  afterward  declared. 

The  third  consideration  of  it,  is,  being  a  penalty,  or  a 
punishment;   to  clear  this,  I  shall  demonstrate  four  things. 

1.  What  punishment,  properly  so  called,  is. 

2.  That  Christ's  death  was  a  punishment,  or  that  in  his 
death  he  did  undergo  punishment. 

3.  What  that  was  that  Christ  underwent,  or  the  material 
cause  of  that  punishment. 

4.  Wherein  the  formality  of  its  being  a  punishment  did 
consist;  or  whence  that  dispensation  had  its  equity. 

For  the  first  I  shall  give  the  definition  of  it,  or  the  de- 
scription of  its  general  nature, 

2.  The  ends  of  it  are  to  be  considered. 

For  the  first,  that  usual  general  description  seemeth  to 
be  comprehensive  of  the  whole  nature  of  punishment;  it  is, 
*  malum  passionis,  quod  infligitur  ob  malum  actionis,'  an 
evil  of  suffering  inflicted  for  doing  evil.  Or  more  largely  to 
describe  it;  it  is  an  effect  of  justice  in  him,  who  hath  sove- 
reign power  and  right,  to  order  and  dispose  of  offenders, 
whereby  he  that  doth  contrary  to  the  rule  of  his  actions,  is 
recompensed  with  that  which  is  evil  to  himself,  according  to 
the*  demerit  of  his  fault. 

1.  It  is  an"  effect  of  justice;  hence  God's  punishing  is 

*  Si  non  reddit  faciendo  quod  debet  reddet  patiendo  quod  debet.  August,  lib.  3, 
de  lib.  Arbit. 

^  Vid.  Diat.  de  Just.  Viiidic.  StKtj  ■rif/.cjo^laq  d'/sa'iTnait  waji  tZv  Tr^ovi^mwoTOiv.  Hier. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  47 

"often  called  an  inflicting  of  anger,  as  Rora.  ill.  5.  *  Is  God  un- 
righteous, 6  lirKp^phiv  Ti)v  opjriv,  who  inflicteth  anger?'  Anger 
is  put  for  the  justice  of  God,  Rom.  i.  18. '  the  anger  or  wrath 
of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven,'  8cc.  That  is,  his  vindictive 
justice  against  sin,  is  manifested  by  its  effects;  and  again, 
the  cause  for  the  effect.  Anger  for  the  effect  of  it  in  pu- 
nishment. And  therefore  we  have  translated  the  word  '  ven- 
geance,' Rom.  iii.  5.  which  denotes  the  punishment  itself. 

2.  It  is  of  him,  who  hath  sovereign  power,  and  judiciary 
right  to  dispose  of  the  offenders  ;  and  this  is  either  imme- 
diate in  God  himself,  as  in  the  case  whereof  we  speak  ;  he 
is  the  only  *  lawgiver,  who  is  able  to  save,  and  destroy;' 
Jam.  iv.  12.  or  it  is  by  him  delegated  to  men,  for  the  use  of 
human  society  ;  so  Christ  tells  Pilate,  he  could  have  no 
power  over  hira  (wliomhe  considered  as  a  malefactor)  unless 
it  was  given  him  from  above;  John  xix.  11.  though  that  is 
spoken  in  reference  to  that  peculiar  dispensation. 

3.  The  nature  of  it  consists  in  this,  that  it  be  evil  to  him, 
.on  whom  it  is  inflicted,  either  by  the  immission  of  that 

which  is  corrupting,  vexing,  and  destroying,  or  the  sub- 
traction of  that  which  is  cheering,  useful,  good,  and  desir- 
able, in  what  kind  soever.  And,  therefore,  did  the  ancients 
call  the  punishment '  fraus,'  because,  when  it  came  upon  men, 
they  had  deceived,  and  cut  short  themselves  of  some  good, 
that  otherwise  they  might  have  enjoyed.  So  the  historian,*^ 
'  Cseterse  multitudini  diem  statuit,  antequam  liceret  sine 
fraude  ab  armis  discedere  :'  that  is,  that  they  might  go  away 
freely,  without  punishment.  And  so  is  that  expression  ex- 
plained by  Ulpian  ;  Dig.  lib.  20.  '  Capitalem  fraudem  ad- 
raittere,  est  tale  aliquid  delinquere,  propter  quod,  capitepu- 
niendus  sit.'  ^ 

The  schoolmen  have  two  rules  that  pass  amongst  them 
without  control.  1.  That  *  Omne  peccatum  est  adeo  vo- 
luntarium,  ut  si  non  sit  voluntarium  non  est  peccatum.'  It 
is  so  of  the  nature  of  sin,  that  it  be  voluntary,  that  if  any 
thing  be  not  voluntary,  it  is  not  sin.  The  other  is,  *  est  ex 
natura  pcente  ut  sit  involuntaria :'  it  is  so  of  the  nature  of 
punishment,  that  it  be  against  the  will  of  him  that  is  punished, 
that  if  it  be  not  so,  it  is  not  punishment. 

Neither  of  which  rules  is  true,  yea,  the  latter  is  undoubt- 

•^  Salust.bcil.  Catil. 


48  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

edly  false.  For  the  first,  every  sin  is  thus  far  indeed  volun- 
tary, that  what  is  done  contrary  to  the  express  will  of  him 
that  doth  it,  is  not  his  sin  ;  but  that  the  actual  will,  or  will- 
ing of  the  sinner  is  required,  to  make  any  thing  his  sin,  is 
false.  In  the  case  of  original  sin  manifestly  ;  wherefore 
John  gives  us  another  definition  of  sin  than  theirs  is,  that  it 
is, '  dictum,  factum,  concupitum,  contra  legem ;'  namely,  that 
it  is  avofiia,  '  a  transgression  of  the  law ;'  have  it  the  actual 
consent  of  the  will  or  no,  if  it  be  a  transgression  of  the  law, 
an  inconformity  to  the  law,  it  is  sin. 

For  the  latter  it  is  true  indeed,  that  for  the  most  part  it 
falls  out,  that  every  one  that  is  to  be  punished,  is  unwilling 
to  undergo  it ;  and  there  is  an  improper  nolleity  (if  I  may  so 
speak)  in  nature,  unto  the  subtracting  of  any  good  from  it, 
or  the  immission  of  any  evil  upon  it ;  yet,  as  to  the  perfec- 
tion of  the  nature  of  punishment,  there  is  no  more  required, 
than  what  was  laid  down  in  general  before,  that  there  be 
'  malum  passionis,  ob  malum  actionis,'  a  suffering  of  evil  for 
doing  of  evil,  whether  men  will  or  no.  Yea,  men  may  be 
willing  to  it,  as  the  soldiers  of  Caesar  after  their  defeat  at^ 
Dyrrachium,  came  to  him,  and  desired  that  they  might  be 
punished, '  more  antiquo  :'  being  ashamed  of  their  flight.  But 
whatever  really  or  personally  is  evil  to  a  man,  for  his  evil  is 
punishment ;  though  chiefly  among  the  Latins,  punishment 
relates  to  things  real :  capital  revenges  had  another  name. 
Punishments  were  chiefly  pecuniary,  as  Servius  on  that  of 
Virgil :  *  Post  mihi  non  simili  poena  commissaluetis:  luetis: 
persolvetis  :  et  hie  sermo  a  pecunia  descendit,  antiquorum 
enim  pceneeomnes  pecuniarice  fuerunt.'  And  '  supplicium'  is 
of  the  same  importance.  Punishments  were  called  "supplicia,' 
because  with  the  mulcts  of  men,  they  sacrificed,  and  made 
their  supplications  to  God  :  whence  the  word  is  sometimes 
used  for  that  worship  ;  as  in  Salustius,  describing  the  old 
Romans,  he  says  they  were  in  '  suppliciis  Deorum  magnifici/ 

4.  There  is  the  procuring  cause  of  it,  which  is,  doing 
evil,  contrary  to  the  law  and  rule  whereby  the  offender  ought 
to  walk,  and  regulate  his  actings  and  proceedings :  '  omnis 
poena,  si  justa  est,  peccati  poena  est,'  says  Aug.  indeed,  not 

d  Quanta fortitndine  dimicaverint,  festiinonioest,  quod  adverso  seniel  apud  Djira- 
cliiuni  prnelio,  pcenaiii  in  se  ultro  depoposcuiit.  Sueton.  in  Jul.Cees.  cap.  68.  More 
patrio  dcciijiari  voiueruiit.  Appianus, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  49 

only,  *  si  justa  est/  but '  si  poena  est ;'  taking  it  properly, 
offence  must  precede  punishment. 

And  whatever  evil  befalls  any,  that  is  not  procured  by 
offence,  is  not  properly  punishment,  but  hath  some  other 
name  and  nature.  The  name'  poena,'  is  used  for  any  thing  that 
is  vexatious  or  troublesome,  any  toil  or  labour,  as  in  the  tra- 
gedian, speaking  of  one  who  tired  himself  with  travel  in 
hunting.  **  Quid  te  ipse  pcenis  gravibus  infestus  gravas ;'  but 
improperly  is  it  thus  used.  This  Abraham  evinceth  in  his 
plea  with  God  ;  Gen.  xviii.  25.  *  That  be  far  from  thee  to  do 
after  this  manner,  to  slay  the  righteous  with  the  wicked;  and 
that  the  righteous  should  be  as  the  wicked,  that  be  far  from 
thee  :  shall  not  the  judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right  V  It  is  of 
God  as  the  judge  of  all  the  earth  of  whom  he  speaks  ;  that 
is,  of  him  that  hath  the  supreme  power  of  disposing  of  of- 
fenders ;  and  of  his  justice  inflicting;  which,  as  I  said,  was 
the  cause  of  punishment.  It  is  that,  whereby  God  doth  right: 
and  he  gives  the  procuring  cause  of  all  punishment,  the 
•wickedness  of  men  ;  *  That  be  far  from  thee,  to  destroy  the 
righteous  with  the  wicked.'  And  therefore,  that  place  of 
Job,  chap.  ix.  22.  '  This  is  one  thing,  therefore  I  said  it,  he 
destroys  the  perfect  and  the  wicked ;'  is  not  to  be  under- 
stood absolutely,  but  according  to  the  subject  of  the  dispute 
in  hand,  between  him  and  Bildad.  Bildad  says,  chap,  viii.20. 
That '  God  will  not  cast  away  a  perfect  man,'  that  is,  he 
will  not  afflict  a  godly  man  to  death.  He  grants  that  a  godly 
man  may  be  afflicted,  which  Eliphas's  companion  seemed 
to  deny  :  yet,  says  he,  he  will  not  cast  him  avv^ay;  that  is, 
leave  him  without  relief  from  that  affliction,  even  in  this  life. 
To  this  Job's  answer  is, '  this  is  one  thing;'  that  is,  one  thing  I 
am  resolved  on, 'and  therefore  I  said  it,'and  will  abide  by  it, 
*  he  destroyeth  the  perfect  and  the  wicked  ;'  not  only  wicked 
men  are  destroyed  and  cutoff  in  this  life,  but  perfect  men 
also;  but  yet  in  this  very  destruction,  as  there  is  a  difference 
in  the  persons,  one  being  perfect,  the  other  wicked  ;  so  there 
is  in  God's  dealing  with  them;  one  being  afflicted  to  the 
door  of  heaven,  the  other  cursed  into  hell.  But  for  punish- 
ment properly  so  called,  the  cause  is  sin,  or  the  offence  of 
the  person  punished.  And  therefore  in  the  Hebrew,  the 
same  words  (many  of  them)  signify  both  sin  ^nd  punishment; 

•^  Scncc.  llippol.  Act.  3. 


50  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

SO  near  and  indissoluble  is  their  relation.  npoariKU  dijnov^eif 
WC  XP^'"  icXripovofxiag  ^ia^i)(^E(T^at  Trig  irovrfpptag  ttjv  KoXami^. 
Plut.  de  Sera  Numin.  vindicta. 

5.  The  measure  of  any  penalty,  is  the  demerit  of  the  of- 
fence ;  it  is  a  rendering  to  men,  as  for  their  works,  so  ac- 
cording to  them  J 

Nee  vincet  ratio  hoc,  taritiindeni  ut  peccet,  idemque 
•  Qui  teneros  caules  alieni  fregcrit  horti 
Et  qui  noclurnus  Divuni  sacra  legerit.  Adsit 
Regula,  peccatis  quaj  pcenas  irroget  aquas  : 
Nc  scutica  diguum  horribili  seclere  flagcllo. 

I  shall  not  trouble  the  reader  with  the  heathens  appre- 
hension of  Rhadaraanthean  righteousness,  and  the  exact 
rendering  to  every  one  according  to  his  desert  even  in  an- 
other world. 

There  is  a  twofold  rule  of  this  proportion  of  sin  and  pu- 
nishment;  the  one  constitutive,  the  other  declarative.  The 
rule  constitutive  of  the  proportion  of  penalty  for  sin,  is  the 
infinitely  wise,  holy,  and  righteous  will  of  God.  The  rule 
declarative  of  it  is  the  law. 

For  the  first,  it  is  his  judgment  that  they  which  commit 
sin  are  worthy  of  death,  Rom.  i.32.  This  the  apostle  fully 
declares  ;  chap.  ii.  5 — 10.  The  day  of  punishing,  he  calls 
the  day  of  the  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God. 
That  is,  what  his  judgment  is  concerning  the  demerit  of  sin. 
The  world  shall  then  know,  what  in  justice  he  requires  for 
the  due  vengeance  of  it.  And  this  according  to  his  will ; 
ver.  6.  he  will  in  his  righteous  judgment  render  to  every  one 
according  to  his  deeds. 

And  here  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  though  there  be  an 
exceeding  great  variation  in  sin,  in  respect  of  degrees,  so 
that  some  seem  as  mountains,  others  in  comparison  of  them 
but  as  molehills,  yet  it  is  the  general  nature  of  sin  (which  is 
the  creatures  subducting  itself  from  under  the  dominion  of 
God,  and  dependance  upon  him),  that  punishment  original 
is  suited  unto  ;  whence  death  is  appointed  to  every  sin,  and 
that  eternal ;  wherein  the  degrees  of  punishment  vary  not 
the  kind. 

2.  Fors  the  several  kinds  of  punishment  (I  call  them  so, 

f  Hor.  Sat.  lit»|  1.  3. — Vid.  Catonis  orat.  apud  Salust.  Bel.  Catalin, 
S  Piinieudis  ])t'ccatis  (re  scsse  debere  causas  existiiiiatuin  est.  Una  est  quae  vov^ea-la 
•vel  xoXacri;  vel  wapaiVes-ic  dicitur :  cum  poena  adliibetur  tastigaridi  atque  emendandi 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  51 

in  a  general  acceptation  of  both  words)  they  are  distin- 
guished according  to  their  ends  and  causes ;  the  ends  of 
punishments,  or  all  such  things  as  have  in  them  the  nature 
of  punishments,  may  be  referred  to  the  ensuing  heads. 

1.  The  first  end  of  punishment,  is,  the  good  of  him  that 
is  punished,  and  this  is  twofold.  1.  For  amendment,  and 
recovery  from  the  evil  and  sin  that  he  hath  committed.  Thi.tv 
kind  of  punishing  is  frequently  mentioned  in  Scripture ;  so 
eminently.  Lev.  xxvi.  doth  the  Lord  describe  itat  large,  and 
insists  upon  it,  reckoning  up  in  a  long  series,  a  catalogue 
of  several  judgments ;  he  interposing,  *  But  if  ye  shall  not  be 
reformed  by  these  things,  but  will  walk  contrary  to  me,'  as 
ver.  25.  then  will  I  do  so  and  so,  or  add  this  or  that  pu- 
nishment to  them  foregoing :  and  this  in  reference  to  the 
former  end  of  their  reformation,  and  the  success  of  this 
procedure,  we  find  variously  expressed ;  sometimes  the 
end  of  it  in  some  measure  was  fulfilled,  Psal.  xviii.  32 — 35. 
sometimes  otherwise,  Isa.  i.  5.  'Why  should  you  be  smit- 
ten any  more?  you  will  revolt  more  and  more  ;'  intimating, 
that  the  end  of  the  former  smiting  was  to  cure  their  revolt- 
ings.  And  this  kind  of  pumshment  is  called''  vov^earia  cor- 
rection for  instruction ;  and  is  not  punishment  in  its  strict 
and  proper  sense. 

2.  For  the  taking  off  of  sinners,  to  prevent  such  other 
wickednesses  as  they  would  commit,  should  patience  be  ex- 
ercised towards  them.  The  very  heathen  saw,  that  he  that 
was  wicked  and  not  to  be  reclaimed,  it  was  even  good  for 
him,  and  to  him,  that  he  should  be  destroyed.  Such  a  one 
as  Plutarch  says,  was  iripoig  ye  Travrwc  jSAa/Sepov  avriij  re 
/BXajSepwTarov,  *  hurtful  to  others,  but  most  of  all  to  himself.' 
HoW  much  more  is  this  evident  to  us,  who  know  that  future 
judgments  shall  be  proportionably  increased  to  the  wicked- 
ness of  men  in  this  world;  and  if  every  drop  of  judgment 
in  the  world  to  come,  be  incomparably  greater  than  the 
greatest  and  heaviest  a  man  can  possibly  sufier  in  this  life, 
or  lose  his  life  by,  it  is  most  evident,  that  a  man  may  be 

gratia,  ut  is  qui  fortuito  deliquit,  attentior  fiat,  corrcctiorque.  Altera  est,  quani  ii, 
qui  vocabula  ista  ciiriosiiis  diviserunt,  nfjiw^iav  appellant,  ea  causa  aniinatlverteiuli 
est,  quura  dignitas  authoritasque  ejus,  in  queui  est  pcccatum  tuenda  est,  iie  pra:- 
termissa  animadversio  contemptuni  ejus  pariat,  et  hoiiorem  elevet,  &c.  vid.  A.  Gell. 
lib.  6.  cap.  24. 

••  YiM  yaj  h  vov^iria  xat  o  ^oyo;  IfA.Tton'i  joceravoiav  aal  aiVj^uvtjv.  Plut.  de  virlut. 


62  OF    THE    SATISFACTON    OF    CHRIST. 

punished  with  death  for  his  own  good;  'mitius  punientur.' 
This  is  KoXaaia.  And  this  hath  no  place  in  human  adminis- 
trations of  punishments,  when  they  arise  to  death  itself;  men 
cannot  kill  a  man,  to  prevent  their  dealing  worse  with  him, 
for  that  is  their  worst;  they  can  do  no  more  says  our  Saviour; 
but  accidentally  it  maybe  for  his  good.  Generally  KoXaarig, 
or  KoXacria,  is,  as  'Aristotle  speaks,  iraaKOvTog  tveKa  ;  and  is 
thereby  differenced  from  rt/iwpio (of  which  afterward),  which 
as  he  says,  is  tou  iroLovv-og  evBKa  'Iva  aTTOTrXrjjowS'^.  Hence 
iiKoXdaTog,  is  one  not  corrected,  not  restrained,  '  incastiga- 
tus.'  And  therefore,  the  punishment  of  death  cannot  at  all 
properly  be  KoXaaig :  but  cutting  off  by  God  to  prevent  far- 
ther sin,  hath  in  it  t\  avaXoyov  thereunto. 

2.  The  second  end  of  punishment,  which  gives  a  second 
kind  of  them  in  the  general  sense  before-mentioned,  is  for 
the  good  of  others,  and  this  also  is  various. 

1.  For  the  good  of  them  that  may  be  like  minded  with 
him  that  is  punished;  that  they  may  be  deterred,  affrighted, 
and  persuaded  from  the  like  evils.  This  was  the  end  of 
the  punishing  of  the  presumptuous  sinner;  Deut.  xvii. 
12,  13.  '  That  man  shall  die,  and  all  the  people  shall  hear, 
and  fear,  and  do  no  more  presumptuously.'  'The  people  ;' 
that  is,  any  among  them  that  was  like  minded  unto  him  that 
was  stoned  and  destroyed.  So  in  some  places  they  have 
taken  lions  that  have  destroyed  me«,  and  hung  them  on 
crosses,  to  fright  others  that  should  attempt  the  like.  Hence 
'exemplum,'  is  sometimes  put  absolutely  for  punishment, 
because  punishment  is  for  that  end.  So  in  the  Comedian,'' 
*  Quae  futura  exempla  dicunt  in  eum  indigna ;'  on  which 
place  Donatus,  '  graves  pceuEE,  quae  possunt  cseteris  docu- 
mento  esse,  exempla  dicuntur.'  And  this  is  a  tacit  end  in 
human  punishment.  I  do  not  know  that  God  hath  cora- 
niitted  any  pure  revenge  unto  men ;  that  is,  punishing  with 
a  mere  respect  to  what  is  past.  Nor  should  one  man  de- 
stroy another,  but  for  the  good  of  others.  Now  the  good 
of  no  man  lies  in  revenge.  The  content  that  men  take 
therein,  is  their  sin,  and  cannot  be  absolutely  good  to  them. 
So  the  philosopher,'  'nemo  prudens  punit  quia  peccatura 
est,  sed  ne  peccetur  ;  revocari  enim  preeterita  non  possunt, 
futura  prohibeantur  :'  and  Rom.  xiii.  4.  '  If  ye  do  that  which 

*  Arist,  Khct.  1.  ^  Tereiit.  Eunuch,  act.  .5.  see.  4.  '  Sen. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTON    OF    CHRIST.  53 

is  evil,  be  afraid,'  &c.  See  what  he  hath  done  to  others,  and 
be  afraid. 

2.  It  is  for  the  good  of  others,  that  they  may  not  be 
hurt  in  the  like  kind,  as  some  were  by  the  sin  of  hira  who 
is  punished  for  it.  This""  seems  to  be  the  main  end  of  that 
great  fundamental  law  of  human  society,  *  Let  him  that  hath 
killed  by  violence  be  killed,  that  the  rest  of  men  may  live 
in  peace.'  And  these  kinds  of  punishments  in  reference  to 
this  end  are  called  ira paddy fiara,"^  *  examples  ;'  that  others  by 
impunity  be  not  enticed  to  evil,  and  that  the  residue  of  men 
may  be  freed  from  the  barm  that  is  brought  upon  them,  by 
reason  of  such  evils. 

Hence  the  historian  says,  that  commonwealths  should 
rather  be  mindful  of  things  done  evilly,  than  of  good  turns  ; 
the  forgetfulness  of  the  latter,  is  a  discouragement  to  some 
good,  but  of  the  former  an  encouragement  to  all  licentious- 
ness. Thus  Joseph"  suspecting  his  espoused  consort,  yet 
refused  TrapadnyfiaTiaai,  to  make  an  open  example  of  her  by 
punishment.  And  these''  punishments  are  thus  called  from 
their  use,  and  not  from  their  own  nature  ;  and  therefore, 
differ  not  from  KoXaaiai  and  Tifxh^piai,  but  only  as  to  the  end 
and  use  from  whence  they  have  their  denomination. 

3.  The  good  of  him  that  punisheth  is  aimed  at,  and  this 
is  proper  to  God.  Man  punisheth  not,  nor  can,  nor  ought, 
for  his  own  good,  or  the  satisfaction  of  his  own  justice  ;  but 
*God  made  all  things  for  himself,  and  the  wicked  for  the  day 
of  evil;*  Prov.  xvi.  4.  Rom.  ix.  22.  and  in  God's  dealing 
with  men,  whatever  he  doth  unless  it  be  for  this  end,  it  is 
not  properly  punishment. 

This  is  Tt^wof'a,  *  vindictanoxse;' purely  the  recompensing 
of  the  evil  that  is  committed,  that  it  may  be  revenged.  This, 
I  say,  in  God's  dealing  is  properly  punishment,  the  revenge 
of  the  evil  done,  that  himself,  or  his  justice  may  be  satisfied, 
as  was  seen  before,  from  Rom.  ii.  7 — 9.  Whatever  of  evil 
God  doth  to  any,  which  is  therefore  called  punishment,  be- 
cause it  partaketh  of  the  general  nature  of  punishment,  and 
is  evil  to  him  that  is  punished;  yet  if  the  intendment  of 

"'  Nalurale  jus  lalionis  liic  iiidicatur.  Grot,  in  Gen.  i.K.  6. 
"  Iiule  'Bia^aliiyiJi.a.Tix.l^  a-vWoyia-j/.'-t;,  c\.  7ia^ahiy(ji.a.T{)dt  EV&u^Ejua.  "  MaU.  i.  19. 

P  KoXttS"aTE    Se  d^tiii;   toi'tsl?  t£  xal  roX^  oXXiij  avy.y.i.'^oi^  7ta^n.hiy(A,a  <ra<^i<;  xara- 
a^fiactrt,  Tliucid.  lib.  .S. 


54  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

God  be  not  to  revenge  the  evil  past  upon  him,  in  a  propor- 
tion of  law,  it  is  not  punishment  properly  so  called.  And 
therefore  it  will  not  suffice  to  prove  that  believers  are,  or 
may  be  punished  for  sin,  to  heap  up  texts  of  Scripture, 
where  they  are  said  to  be  punished,  and  that  in  reference  to 
their  sin  ;  unless  it  can  be  also  proved,  that  God  doth  it '  ani- 
mo  ulciscendi,'  and  that  their  punishment  is' vindicta  noxae,' 
and  that  it  is  done  rov  ttovovvtoq  tvsKa  Iva  aTroTrXrjjOoS'jj :  but 
of  this  I  am  not  now  to  treat.  The  reader  may  hence  see 
what  punishment  is  in  general ;  what  are  the  ends  of  it,  and 
its  kinds  from  thence ;  and  what  is  punishment  from  God, 
properly  so  called.  It  is  'vindicta  noxae,  animo  ulciscendi, 
ut  ipsi  satisfiat :'  and  this  kind  of  punishment  was  the  death 
of  Christ :  which  is  to  be  proved. 

3.  That  the  death  of  Christ  was  a  punishment  properly 
so  called,  which  is  the  third  consideration  of  it,  as  I  said,  is 
next  to  be  proved.  Of  all  the  places  of  Scripture  and  testi- 
monies whereby  this  may  be  demonstrated,  I  shall  fix  only 
on  one  portion  of  Scripture  :  and  that  is,  Isa.  liii.  What  in 
particular  shall  be  produced  from  thence,  will  appear  when  I 
have  given  some  general  considerations  of  the  chapter,  which 
I  shall  do  at  large,  as  looking  on  that  portion  of  Scripture 
as  the  sum  of  what  is  spoken  in  the  Old  Testament,  con- 
cerning the  satisfactory  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 

1.  This  whole  prophecy  from  ver.  13.  of  chap.  lii.  which 
is  the  head  of  the  present  discourse,  is  evinced  to  belong  to 
the  Messias,  against  the  Jews. 

1.  Because  the  Chaldee  paraphrast,  one  of  their  most 
ancient  masters,  expressly  names  the  Messias,  and  interprets 
that  whole  chapter  of  him  ;  <  Behold,' saith  he,  '  my  servant 
the  Messias  shall  declare  prudently.'  And  the  ancient  rab- 
bins, as  is  abundantly  proved  by  others,  were  of  the  same 
mind.  Which  miserably  entangles  their  present  obdurate 
masters,  who  would  fix  the  prophecy  upon  any,  rather  than 
on  the  Messias.  Seeing  evidently,  that  if  it  be  proved  to 
belong  to  the  Messias  in  thesi,  it  can  be  applied  to  none 
other  in  hi/pothesi,  but  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

2.  Because  they  are  not  able  to  find  out,  or  fix  on  any 
one  whatever,  to  whom  the  things  here  spoken  of,  may  be 
accommodated.  They  speak  indeed  of  Jeremiah,  Josias,  a 
rio-hteous  man  in  general,  the  whole    people  of  Israel,  of 


OF    THE    SATISFACTIOX    OF    CHRIST.  55 

Messiah  Ben  Joseph,  a  man  of  straw  of  theii'  own  setting 
up ;  but  it  is  easy  to  manifest,  were  that  our  present  work, 
that  scarce  any  one  expression  in  this  prophecy,  much  less 
all,  do  or  can  agree  to  any  one,  or  all  of  them  named,  so  that 
it  must  be  brought  home  to  its  proper  subject:  of  this  at 
large  in  the  ensuing  digression  against  Grotius. 

2.  That  to  us  it  is  evident  above  all  contradiction,  that 
the  whole  belongs  to  Jesus  Christ ;  because  not  only  parti- 
cular testimonies  are  taken  from  hence  in  the  New  Testament 
and  applied  to  him,  as  Matt.  viii.  17.  Mark.  xv.  28.  Luke 
xxii.  37.  Rom.  x.  16.  but  it  is  also  expounded  of  him  in  ge- 
neral for  the  conversion  of  souls;  Acts  viii.  28.  The  story  is 
known  of  Philip  and  the  eunuch, 

3.  This  is  such  a  prophecy  of  Christ,  as  belongs  to  him 
not  only  properly,  but  immediately:  that  is,  it  doth  not  in 
the  first  place  point  out  any  type  of  Christ,  and  by  him  sha- 
dow out  Christ,  as  it  is  in  sundry  psalms,  where  David  and 
Solomon  are  firstly  spoken  of,  though  the  Messias  be  prin- 
cipally intended:  but  here  is  no  such  thing.  Christ  himself 
is  immediately  spoken  of.  Socinus  says  indeed,  that  he 
doubted  not  but  that  these  things  did  primarily  belong  to 
another,  could  he  be  discovered  who  he  was,  and  that  from 
him  was  the  allusion  taken,  and  the  accommodation  made 
to  Christ :  '  and  if,'  saith  he,  '  it  could  be  found  out  who  he 
was,  much  light  might  be  given  into  many  expressions  in  the 
chapter.'  But  this  is  a  bold  figment,  for  which  there  is  not 
the  least  countenance  given  either  from  Scripture  or  reason; 
which  is  evidently  decried  from  the  former  arguments, 
whereby  the  impudency  of  the  Jews  is  confounded  ;  and 
shall  be  farther  in  the  ensuing  digression,  where  it  shall  be 
proved,  that  it  is  impossible  to  fix  on  any  one  but  Jesus  Christ, 
to  whom  the  several  expressions,  and  matters  expressed  in 
this  prophecy  may  be  accommodated. 

2.  Now  there  are  three  general  parts  of  this  prophecy,  to 
consider  it  with  reference  to  the  business  in  hand.  As  the 
seat  of  this  truth  in  the  Old  Testament, 

1.  A  description  given  of  Christ,  in  a  mean,  low,  misera- 
ble condition,  from  ver.  14.  of  chap.  lii.  to  ver.  5.  of  chap, 
liii.  His  'visage  was  marred,  and  his  form,  more  than  the 
sons  of  men,  he  hath  no  form,  nor  comeliness,'  ver.  2.  'No 
beauty,  a  man  of  grief  and  sorrows,  despised,  neglected,  ac- 


56  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

quainted  with  grief;*  ver.  3.  looked  on  'as  stricken  and  af- 
flicted of  God,'  ver.  4. 

2.  The  reason  is  given  of  this  representation  of  the  Mes- 
sias,  of  whom  it  is  said  in  the  entrance  of  the  prophecy,  that 
he  should  deal  prudently,  and  be  exalted,  and  extolled,  and 
be  very  high.  To  which  this  description  of  him  seems  most 
adverse  and  contrary.  The  reason,  I  say,  hereof  is  given 
from  ver.  5.  to  the  10.  it  was  on  the  account  of  his  being 
punished,  and  broken  for  us,  and  our  sins. 

3.  The  issue  of  all  this  from  ver.  10.  to  the  end,  in  the 
justification  and  salvation  of  believers. 

It  is  the  second  that  I  shall  insist  upon,  to  prove  the  death 
of  Christ,  to  have  in  it  the  nature  of  punishment,  properly  and 
strictly  so  called. 

Not  to  insist  upon  all  the  particular  passages,  that  might 
be  done  to  great  advantage,  and  ought  to  be  done,  did  I  pur- 
pose the  thorough  and  full  handling  of  the  business  before 
me  (but  I  am 'in  transitu,'  and  pressing  to  somewhat  farther), 
I  shall  only  urge  two  things. 

1.  The  expressions  throughout,  that  describe  the  state 
and  condition  of  Christ  as  here  proposed. 

2.  One  or  two  singular  assertions,  comprehensive  of  much 
of  the  rest. 

For  the  first,  let  the  reader  consider  what  is  contained  in 
the  several  words,  liere  setting  forth  the  condition  of  Christ ; 
we  have,  'despising  and  rejecting,  sorrow  and  grief;'  ver.  4. 
He  was  'stricken,  smitten,  afflicted;'  or  there  was  striking, 
smiting,  affliction  on  him,  'Wounded,  bruised,  chastised 
with  stripes ;'  ver.  5.  wounding,  bruising,  chastising  unto 
soreness,  oppressed,  stricken,  cut  off,  killed,  brought  to 
slaughter;  ver.  7—9.  'Bruised,  sacrificed,  and  his  soul 
made  an  offering  for  sin  ;'  ver.  10. 

Now  certainly  for  the  material  part,  or  the  matter  of  pu- 
nishment, here  it  is  abundantly :  here  is  'malum  passionis'  in 
every  kind.  Immission  of  evil,  subtraction  of  good  in  soul 
and  body:  here  is  plentiful  measure  heaped  up,  shaken  to- 
gether, and  running  over. 

But  it  maybe  said,  though  iiere  be  the  matter  of  punish- 
ment, yet  it  may  be  all  this  was  for  some  other  end  ;  and  so 
it  may  be  it  was  vov^taia,  or  ^oKi[.iaGic,  or  iruLdvaia,  not  ti- 
Idio^na,  or  punishment  properly  so  called. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  57 

Consider  then  the  ends  of  punishment  before  insisted  on, 
and  see  what  of  them  is  applicable  to  the  transaction  be- 
tween God  and  Christ  here  mentioned. 

1.  Was  it  for  his  own  correction?  No,  says  the  prophet, 
ver.  9.  '  He  had  done  no  violence,  neither  was  any  deceit  ia 
his  mouth.'  He  was  perfectly  innocent.  So  that  he  had  no 
need  of  any  chastisement  for  his  amendment ;  and  so  sig- 
nally in  sundry  places,  where  mention  is  made  of  the  death 
of  Christ,  his  own  spotless  innocency  is  often  pleaded.  Nei- 
ther was  it  for  his  instruction  that  he  might  be  wise,  and  in- 
structed in  the  will  of  God  ;  for  at  the  very  entrance  of  the 
prophecy,  chap.  lii.  13.  he  says,  he  shall  deal  prudently  and 
be  exalted.  He  was  faithful  before  in  all  things.  And  though 
he  experimentally  learned  obedience,  by  his  sufferings,  yet 
habitually  to  the  utmost  his  ears  were  bored,  and  himself 
prepared  to  the  will  of  God,  befoi'e  the  afflictions  here  prin- 
cipally intended.     Neither, 

3.  Was  he  TrapaSeiyima ;  punished  for  example ;  to  be 
made  an  example  to  others,  that  they  might  not  offend  :  for 
what  can  offenders  learn  from  the  punishment  of  one  who 
never  offended.  He  was  'cutoff,  but  not  for  himself:'  and 
the  end  assigned,  ver.  11,  12.  which  is  not  the  instruction 
only,  but  the  justification  and  salvation  of  others,  will  not 
allow  this  end.  '  He  shall  justify  many,  for  he  shall  bear  their 
iniquities ;'  he  set  us  an  example  in  his  obedience ;  but  he 
was  not  punished  for  an  example.     Neither, 

4.  Was  it  inaprvpia,  a  suffering  to  bear  witness  and  tes- 
timony to  the  truth.  There  is  no  mention  of  any  such  end 
in  this  place.  Yea,  to  make  that  the  main  intendment  here, 
is  a  monstrous  figment.  The  expressions  all  along  as  we 
shall  see  in  the  next  place,  are,  that  all  this  was  for  our  trans- 
gressions, for  our  sins,  for  our  iniquities,  for  our  peace.  God 
wounded,  bruised,  killed  him,  for  our  iniquities  ;  that  is,  he 
died  to  bear^witness  to  his  doctrine.     'Credat  Apella.' 

2.  Then,  the  matter  of  punishment  being  expressed,  see 
the  cause  of  the  infliction  of  it.  It  was  for  transgressions,  for 
iniquities,'^ver.  5.  for  wandering  and  iniquity,  ver.  6.  for 
transgressions,  ver.  8,  for  sin,  ver.  12.  Let  us  now  remem- 
ber the  general  description  of  punishment  that  was  given 
at  the  beginning;  it  is  'malum  passionis  quod  infligitur  ob 
malum  actionis,'  and  see  how  directly  it  suits  with  this  pu- 

VOL.  IX,  1 


58  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

nishment  of  Jesus  Christ.  1.  Here  is  *  malum  passionis' in- 
flicted, wounding,  bruising,  killing.  And  2.  there  is  'malum 
actionis'  deserving,  sin,  iniquity,  and  transgression.  How 
these  met  on  an  innocent  person,  shall  be  afterward  declared. 
2.  Go  along  to  the  peculiar  description  of  punishment  pro- 
perly so  called,  as  managed  by  God.  It  is  'vindicta  noxae;' 
now  if  all  other  ends  and  causes  whatever,  as  of  chastisement 
or  example,  &c.  be  removed,  and  this  only  be  asserted,  then 
this  affliction  of  Christ  was  '  vindicta  noxae/  punishment  in 
the  most  proper  sense ;  but  that  these  ends  are  so  removed 
hath  been  declared  upon  the  particular  consideration  of 
them. 

And  this  is  the  first  argument  from  this  place  to  prove 
that  the  death  of  Christ  and  his  suffering,  hath  the  nature 
of  punishment. 

2.  The  second  is,  from  the  more  particular  expressions 
of  it  to  this  purpose,  both  on  the  part  of  the  person  punish- 
ing, and  on  the  part  of  the  person  punished  :  a  single  expres- 
sion on  each  part  may  be  insisted  on. 

1.  On  the  part  of  God  punishing,  take  that  of  ver.  6. 
'  The  Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all :'  of  which 
sort  also  is  that  of  ver.  10.  'Yet  it  pleased  the  Lord  to  bruise 
him,  he  put  him  to  grief,  when  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an 
offering  for  sin.' 

2.  On  the  part  of  him  punished,  ver.  11.  '  He  shall  bear 
their  iniquities.'  Fi'om  the  consideration  of  those  expres- 
sions we  shall  evidently  evince  what  we  haye  proposed.  Of 
these  in  the  next  chapter. 


CHAP.  XXIV. 

Some  particular  testimonies  evincing  the  death  of  Christ  to  he 
a  punishment,  properly  so  called. 

The  two  expressions  that  I  chose  in  particular  to  consider, 
are  nextly  to  be  insisted  on. 

The  first  relates  to  him,  who  did  inflict  the  punishment. 
The  other  to  him  that  was  punished. 

The  first  in  ver.  6.  'The  Lord  laid  on  him  the  iniquities 
of  us  all.'    The  person  punishing,  is  Jehovah,  the  person  pu- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  59 

nished  called  *  him  :1  that  is,  he  who  is  spoken  of  throughout 
the  whole  prophecy  ;  the  Messiah  Jesus  Christ,  as  above 
declared. 

For  the  opening  of  the  words,  that  the  efficacy  of  them  to 
our  purpose  in  hand  may  appear.  Two  of  them  are  especi- 
ally to  be  considered.  1.  What  is  meant  by  that  which  is 
rendered  'laid  on  him,'    2.  What  is  meant  by  'iniquity.' 

The  first  by  our  translation  is  rendered  in  the  margin, 
'  made  to  meet ;'  he  '  made  to  meet ;'  '  on  him  the  iniquities  of 
us  all ;'  the  Vulgar  Latin,  'posuit  Dominus  in  eo.'  The  'Lord 
put  upon  him,'  according  to  our  translation  in  the  text. 
'  Montanus,  Dominus  fecit  occurrere  in  eum.'  '  God  hath 
caused  to  meet  on  him,'  according  to  our  translation  in  the 
margin.  Junius  to  the  same  purpose.  '  Jehovah  fecit  ut 
incurrat,' '  the  Lord  made  them  meet,  and  fall  on  him.'  The 
Septuagint  render  it,  kol  Kvpiog  napi^ioKtv  avTOv  raig  a/xapnaig 
rifiiov.  '  The  Lord  delivered  him  to  our  sins,' that  is,  to  be  pu- 
nished for  them.  By  others  the  word  is  rendered  '  impegit, 
traduxit,  conjecit,'  all  to  the  same  purpose,  importing  an  act 
of  God  in  conveying  our  sins  to  Christ. 

The  word  here  used  is  y>JDn ;  its  root  is  ytl^JD  to  which 
all  the  significations  mentioned,  are  assigned ;  'occurrere, 
obviam  ire,  incurrere,  aggredi,  rogare,  precari.'  The  first 
general  signification  of  it  is  to  meet,  as  the  bounds  of  a 
field,  or  country,  or  house,  meet  with  one  another.  Joshua 
xix.  34.  ]Vl3p  j^Jisn  So  all  along  in  that  chapter,  where  the 
bounds  of  one  country  are  said  to  reach  to  another ;  that 
is,  to  meet  with  them  ;  it  is  the  word  here  used.  So  in  vo- 
luntary agents,  it  is  '  obviam  ire,'  or  to  meet,  and  that  either 
for  good  or  evil ;  for  good  it  is  spoken  of  God,  Psal.  Ixiv.  5. 
thou  meetest  him,  &c.  and  so  for  evil,  Amos  v.  19.  'as  if  a 
man  fled  from  a  lion,  and  a  bear  meet  him :'  lyjDl  that  is,  to 
tear  him  in  pieces.  Hence  because  men  that  met  others, 
went  to  them,  to  desire  some  help  of  them,  the  word  also 
signifies  to  ask,  to  pray,  entreat,  or  intercede ;  so  the  word 
is  used  Isa.  lix.  16.  there  was  no  entreater,  y>JDD  none  to 
meet,  to  come  and  ask.  And  in  this  very  chapter,  ver.  12. 
he  made  intercession  for  the  transgressors ;  the  word  is  the 
same  with  that  here  used;  to  meet  the  Lord,  and  intercede 
for  transgressors,  to  stay  his  hand  against  them,  is  its 
sense. 

F  2 


60  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

2.  To  meet,  or  to  make  to  meet  properly,  which  is  the 
first,  and  most  clear  sense  of  the  word.  It  is  often  used  for 
to  meet  '  anirao  hostili,'  to  meet,  to  fall  upon  for  hurt,  1  Sam. 
xxii.  17.  the  servants  of  the  king  would  not  put  forth  the 
hand  yjD*?  to  meet,  that  is,  as  we  have  translated  it,  to  fall 
upon  the  priests  and  kill  them;  so  2  Sam.  i.  15.  David  bid 
his  young  man  arise,  yjD  fall  upon  the  Amalekite,  that  is,  to 
kill  him.  Judg.  xv.  12.  Samson  made  the  men  of  Judah 
swear  that  they  would  not  ppDD  meet  with  him,  or  fall  on 
him  themselves. 

Nextly,  it  may  be  inquired  in  what  sense  the  word  is  here 
used,  whether  in  the  first  spoken  of,  to  ask,  entreat,  inter- 
cede ;  or  in  the  latter,  to  meet ;  or  to  meet  with. 

Grotius  interpreteth  it  (to  remove,  so  much  of  his  inter- 
pretation by  the  way),  'permisit  Deus,  ut  ille  nostro  gravi 
crimine  indignissima  pateretur;'  that  so  he  might  suit  what 
is  spoken  to  Jeremiah,  without  pretence  or  colour  of  proof. 
For  the  word,  it  is  forty-six  times  used  in  the  Old  Testament, 
and  if  in  any  one  of  them  it  may  be  truly  rendered  'permisit,' 
as  it  is  done  by  him,  or  to  that  sense,  let  it  be  here  so  ap- 
plied also.  And  for  that  sense,  which  is,  that  God  suffered 
the  Jews  by  their  wickedness  to  entreat  him  evilly,  it  is  most 
remote  from  the  intendment  of  the  words,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  them. 

1.  First  then,  that  the  words  cannot  be  interpreted  to 
pray,  or  intercede,  is  evident  from  the  contexture  ;  wherein 
it  is  said  (in  this  sense)  'he  prayed  him  for  the  iniquity  of  us 
all;'  that  is,  the  Lord  prayed  Christ  for  the  iniquities  of  us 
all.  This  sense  of  the  word  y>JDn  in  this  place,  Socinus 
himself  grants  not  to  be  proper,  nor  consistent.  *  Porro 
significatio  ilia,  precari,  in  loco  nostro  locum  habere  non  po- 
test ;  alioqui  sequeretur  Isaiam  voluisse  dicere,  Deum  fe- 
cisse,  ut  omnium  nostrum  iniquitas  per  Christum,  vel  pro 
Christo  precata  fuerit,  quod  longe  absurdissimumesse  nemo 
non  videt.'  cap.  21.  p.  132,  Praelec.  Socin. 

2.  It  is  then  '  to  meet :'  now  the  word  here  used  being  in 
hiphil,  which  makes  a  double  action  of  that  expressed  by 
adding  the  cause,  by  whose  power,  virtue,  and  impress,  the 
thing  is  done  ;  thence  it  is  here  rendered  '  occurrere  fecit,' 
*  he  made  to  meet,'  and  so  the  sense  of  it  is,  God  made  our 
sins,  as  it  were,  to  set  upon,  or  to  fall  upon  Jesus  Christ, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  61 

which  is  the  most  common  use  of  the  word,  as  hath  been 
shewed. 

It  is  objected,  that  the  word  signifies  to  meet,  yet  no 
more  but  this  may  be  the  meaning  of  them ;  God  in  Christ 
met  with  all  our  iniquities  ;  that  is,  for  their  pardoning,  and 
removal,  and  taking  away. 

Of  the  many  things  that  may  be  given  in  for  the  ever- 
sion  of  this  Gloss,  1  shall  name  only  two,  whereof  the  first 
is  to  the  word,  the  latter  to  the  matter.  For  the  word ;  the 
conjugation  according  to  the  common  rule,  enforces  the 
sense  formerly  mentioned  :  be  made  to  meet,  and  not  be  met. 

2,  The  prophet  in  these  words  renders  a  reason  of  the 
contemptible  sad  condition  of  the  Messiah,  at  which  so 
many  were  scandalized,  and  whereupon  so  few  believed  the 
report  of  the  gospel  concerning  him  ;  and  this  is,  that  '  God 
laid  on  him  our  iniquities  ;'  now  there  is  no  reason  why  he 
should  be  represented  in  so  deplorable  a  state  and  condition, 
if  God  only  met  with,  and  prevented  our  sin,  in  and  by  him, 
which  he  did  (as  they  say)  in  his  resurrection,  wherein  he 
was  exceeding  glorious  ;  so  that  the  meaning  of  the  word  is, 
that  God  made  our  sins  to  meet  on  him,  by  laying  them  on 
him;  and  this  sense  Socinus  himself  consents  unto,  Praelec. 
cap.  21.  p.  133.  But  this  also  will  farther  appear  in  the  ex- 
plication of  the  next  word  :  and  that  is  'our  iniquities.' 

*  He  hath  laid  on  him  the  iniquities  of  us  all.'  py  How 
the  iniquitiy  of  us,  that  is,  the  punishment  of  our  iniquity? 
I  shall  offer  three  things,  to  make  good  this  interpretation. 

1.  That  the  word  is  often  found  in  that  sense  ;  so  that  it 
is  no  new,  or  uncouth  thing,  that  here  it  should  be  so.  Gen. 
iv.  13.  >31j; '  mine  iniquity'  is  greater  than  I  can  bear,  it  is  the 
same  word  here  used  ;  they  are  the  words  of  Cain,  upon  the 
denunciation  of  God's  judgment  on  him  ;  and  what  iniquity 
it  is,  he  gives  you  an  account  in  the  next  words,  '  behold 
■thou  hast  cast  me  out,'  ver.  14.  that  was  only  the  punishment 
laid  on  him.  It  is  used  in  like  manner  several  times  ;  Lev. 
XX.  17.  19.  1  Sam.  xxviii.  10.  Saul  swear  to  the  witch,  that 
no  iniquity  should  befall  her;  that  is,  no  punishment  for 
that  which  she  did  at  his  command,  in  raising  up  a  spirit  to 
consult  withal,  contrary  to  the  law.  And  also  in  sundry 
other  places  :  so  that  this  is  no  new  signification  of  the 
word,  and  is  here  most  proper. 


62  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

2.  It  appears  from  the  explication  that  is  given  of  this 
thing  in  many  other  expressions  in  the  chapter.  '  God  laid 
on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all.'  How  ?  in  that  it  pleased  him 
to  'bruise  him,  and  put  him  to  grief;'  ver.  10.  In  that  he 
'  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  and  he  was  bruised  for 
our  iniquities/  ver.  5.  as  will  be  made  more  evident  when  1 
come  to  the  next  phrase :  '  He  bare  our  iniquities/  which  an- 
swers to  this,  '  He  laid  them  on  him.' 

3.  Because  he  did  so  lay  our  sin  on  Christ,  that  he  made 
his  soul  an  offering  for  sin  :  when  our  iniquities  were  on  him, 
his  soul,  that  is,  he  by  a  usual  synecdoche  (the  soul  for 
the  person),  v^^as  made  CZitt'K  an  offering  for  sin;  the  word 
here  used,  is  like '  piaculum'  in  Latin,  which  signifies  the  fault, 
and  him  who  is  punished  for  it  in  a  way  of  a  public  sacri- 
fice. So  is  this  word  taken  both  for  a  sin,  a  trespass,  and  a 
sacrifice  for  the  expiation  of  it.  As  another  word,  viz.  NDn 
is  used  also ;  Lev.  iv.  3.  He  shall  offer  it  riKDn^  for  a  sin ; 
that  is,  an  offering  for  sin;  so  also  Exod.  xxix.  14.  Lev.  iv. 
29.  And  this  very  word  is  so  used  Lev.  vii.  2.  They  shall 
kill  Dl£^X  that  is,  the  sin,  or  sin-offering,  or  trespass-offering, 
as  there  it  is  rendered  :  and  other  instances  might  be  given. 
Now  God  did  so  cause  our  iniquities  to  meet  on  Christ,  that 
he  then  under  them  made  himself  UU}'A  or  an  offering  for  sin. 
Now  in  the  offering  for  sin,  the  penalty  of  the  offence  was, 

*  suo  more,'  laid  on  the  beast,  that  was  sacrificed  or  made  an 
offering;  Paul  interpreteth  these  words  by  other  expressions, 
2  Cor.  v.  21.  he  made  him  to  be  a  sin  for  us,  that  is  an  of- 
fering for  sin,  Dti'K.  He  made  him  sin,  when  he  made  him  a 
curse,  the  curse  of  the  law.  Gal.  iii.  13,  that  is,  gave  him  up 
to  the  punishment,  by  the  law  due  to  sin :  Rom.  viii.  3. 

*  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh, 
and  for  sin,'  kui  ttejoi  afxaQTiaq,  for  sin,  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  con- 
demned sin  in  the  flesh,  Heb.  x.  6.  'OXoKawrw/xara  koi  Trtpi 
ajuapriac  ouk  twSoKrjcrac,  '  in  burnt-offerings,  and  for  sin  thou 
hadst  no  pleasure ;'  and  again,  on  ^vaiav  koL  iTgoa(^o^av  koI 
oXoKauTWjuara  koi  Trepi  afxapriag.  It  appears  then  from  all  that 
hath  been  said,  that  our  iniquities  that  were  laid  on  Christ, 
were  the  punishment  due  to  our  iniquity. 

Farther  to  clear  this,  I  shall  a  little  consider  what  act  of 
God  this  was,  whereby  he  laid  our  iniquities  on  Christ;  and 
these  two  things  are  considerable  therein. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  63 

1.  How  it  was  typically  prefigured. 

2.  How  it  was  done,  or  in  what  act  of  God  the  doing  of 
it  doth  consist. 

1.  This  was  eminently  represented  in  the  great  anniver- 
sary sacrifice,  of  which  I  have  spoken  formerly  ;  especially 
in  that  part  which  concerns  the  goat,*  on  which  the  lot  fell 
to  be  sent  away.  That  that  goat  was  a  sacrifice,  is  evident 
from  ver.  5.  where  both  the  kids  of  the  goats  (afterward 
said  to  be  two  goats),  are  said  to  be  a  sin-offering  ;  how  this 
was  dealt  withal,  see  ver.  21.  *  Aaron  shall  lay  both  his  hands 
upon  the  live  goat,  and  confess  our  sin,  all  the  iniquities  of 
all  the  people,  all  their  transgressions  in  all  their  sins,  and 
put  them  upon  the  head  of  the  goat.'  Now  in  what  sense 
could  the  sins  of  the  people,  be  put  upon  the  head  of  the  goat. 

1.  This  was  not  merely  a  representation:  as  it  were  a 
show  or  pageant,  to  set  forth  the  taking  away  of  ini^quity  : 
but  sins  were  really,  as  to  that  typical  institution,  laid  on  the 
head  of  the  goat:  whence  he  became  a*  piaculum,'  an  avd^rifia, 
and  he  that  touched  him  was  defiled,  so  ver.  26.  The  man 
that  carried  out  the  goat  was  unclean  until  he  was  legally 
purified,  and  that  because  the  sin  of  the  people  was  on  the 
head  of  the  goat,  which  he  so  carried  away. 

2.  The  proper  pravity,  malice,  and  filth  of  sin,  could  not 
be  laid  on  the  goat.  Neither  the  nature  of  the  thing,  nor 
the  subject  will  bear  it ;  for  neither  is  sin,  which  is  a  priva- 
tion, an  irregularity,  an  obliquity,  such  a  thing,  as  that  it  can 
be  translated  from  one  to  another,  although  it  hath  an  infec- 
tious, and  a  contagious  quality  to  diffuse  itself,  that  is,  to 
beget  something  of  the  like  nature  in  others  :  nor  was  the 
goat  a  subject  wherein  any  such  pernicious  or  depraved  habit 
might  reside,  which  belongs  only  to  intelligent  creatures, 
which  have  a  moral  rule  to  walk  by. 

3.  It  must  be  the  punishment  of  sin,  that  is  here  intended, 
which  was  in  the  type  laid  on  the  head  of  the  goat.  And 
therefore  it  was  sent  away  into  a  land  not  inhabited, 
a  land  of  separation,  a  wilderness,  there  to  perish,  as  all  the 
Jewish  doctors  agree  :  that  is,  to  undergo  the  punishment 
that  was  inflicted  on  him.  That  in  such  sacrifices  for  sin, 
there  was  a  real  imputation  of  sin  unto  punishment,  shall  af- 
terward be  farther  cleared. 


64  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

Unto  this  transaction  doth  the  prophet  allude  in  this  ex- 
pression, he  laid  on,  or  put  on  him.  As  the  high-priest  con- 
fessed all  the  sins,  iniquities,  and  transgressions  of  the  peo- 
ple and  laid  them  on  the  head  of  the  scape-goat,  which  he 
bare,  undergoing  the  utmost  punishment  he  was  capable  of, 
and  that  punishment,  which  in  the  general  kind  and  nature 
is  the  punishment,  due  to  sin,  an  evil  and  violent  death.  So 
did  God  lay  all  the  sins,  all  the  punishment  due  to  them, 
really  upon  one  that  was  fit,  able,  and  appointed  to  bear  it, 
which  he  suffered  under  to  the  utmost,  that  the  justice  of 
God  required  on  that  account.  He  then  took  a  view  of  all 
our  sins  and  iniquities.  He  knew  what  was  past  and  what 
was  to  come,  knowing  aH  our  thoughts  afar  off.  Not  the 
least  error  of  our  minds,  darkness  of  our  understandings, 
perverseness  of  our  wills,  carnality  of  our  affections,  sin  of 
our  nature,  or  lives,  escaped  him.  All  were  yvjuva  koI  rerpa 
■)(a\iajjiiva  before  him.  This  is  Set  out  by  the  variety  of  ex- 
pressions used  in  this  matter  in  the  type  ;  all  the  iniquities, 
all  the  transgressions,  and  all  the  sins.  And  so  by  every 
word  whereby  we  express  sin,  in  this  53rd  of  Isaiah  :  going 
astray,  turning  aside,  iniquity,  transgression,  sin,  and  the 
like.  God,  I  say,  made  them  all  to  meet  on  Christ  in  the  pu- 
nishment due  to  them. 

2.  What  is  the  act  of  God,  whereby  he  casts  our  sins  on 
Christ. 

I  have**  elsewhere  considered,  how  God  in  this  business 
is  to  be  looked  on  :  I  said  now  in  the  entrance  of  this  dis- 
course, that  punishment  is  an  effect  of  justice  in  him,  who 
had  power  to  dispose  of  the  offender  as  such.  To  this  two 
things  are  required. 

1.  That  he  have  in  his  hand  power  to  dispose  of  all  the 
concernments  of  the  offence  and  sinner,  as  the  governor  of 
him  and  them  all.  This  is  in  God.  He  is  by  nature  the 
King  and  Governor  of  all  the  world.  Our  Lawgiver  ;  James 
\\.  12.  Having  made  rational  creatures,  and  required  obedi- 
ence at  their  hands,  it  is  essentially  belonging  to  him  to  be 
their*^  Governor,  and  not  only  to  have  the  sovereign  disposal 
of  them,  as  he  hath  the  supreme  dominion  over  them,  with 


*■  Vide  of  the  death  of  Christ,  the  price  he  paid,  and  the  purchase  he  made. 
«  Vid.  Diatrib.  de  Justit.  Divin. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  G5 

the  legal  dispose  of  them,  in  answer  to  the  moral  subjection 
to  him,  and  the  obedience  he  requires  of  them. 

2.  That  as  he  be  a  King,  and  have  supreme  government, 
so  he  be  a  judge  to  put  in  execution  his  justice.  Thus  God  is 
judge  himself,  Psal.  1.  6.  '  He  is  the  judge  of  the  world.'  Gen. 
xviii.  25.  Psal.  xciv.  2.  Psal.  Ixxv.  7.  Isa.  xxxiii.  22.  as  in 
innumerable  other  places.  Now  as  God  is  thus  the  great 
Governor  and  Judge,  he  pursues  the  constitutive  principle  of 
punishment,  his  own  righteous  and  holy  will,  proportioning 
penalties  to  the  demerit  of  sin. 

Thus  in  the  laying  our  sin  on  Christ,  there  was  a  twofold 
act  of  God  :  one  as  a  governor,  the  other  as  a  judge  properly, 

1.  The  first  is, 'innovatio  obligationis,' the 'innovation  of 
the  obligation,'  wherein  we  were  detained,  and  bound  over  to 
punishment.  Whereas  in  the  tenor  of  the  law  as  to  its  ob- 
ligation unto  punishment,  there  was  none  originally  but  the 
name  of  the  offender,  '  In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof 
thou  shaltdie :'  and  '  Cursed  is  every  one  that  continues  not:' 
and  '  the  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die  ;'  God  now  puts  in  the 
name  of  the  surety  of  Jesus  Christ ;  that  he  might  become 
responsible  for  our  sins,  and  undergo  the  punishment  that 
we  were  obliged  to.  Christ  was  viro  v6/.iov  yevofievov,  he 
was  made  under  the  law  ;  that  is,  he  was  put  into  subjection, 
to  the  obligation  of  it  unto  punishment :  God  put  his  name 
into  the  obligation,  and  so  the  law  came  to  have  its  advan- 
tage against  him,  who  otherwise  was  most  free  from  the 
charge  of  it.  Then  was  Christ  made  sin,  when  by  being  put 
into  the  obligation  of  the  law,  he  became  liable  to  the  pu- 
nishment of  it.  He  was  the  Mediator  of  the  new  covenant, 
the  '  Mediator  between  God  and  man  ;'  1  Tim.  ii.  5.  So  a 
Mediator,  as  to  '  lay  down  his  life  a  ransom'  for  them,  for 
whom  he  was  a  Mediator,  ver.  6.  and  the  surety  of  the  cove- 
nant is  he  also  ;  Heb.  vii.  22.  Such  a  surety,  as  paid  that 
which  he  never  took,  made  satisfaction  for  those  sins  which 
he  never  did. 

2.  The  second  act  of  God  as  a  judge,  is  '  inflictio  pcense.' 
Christ  being  now  made  obnoxious,  and  that  by  his  own 
consent,  the  justice  of  God  finding  him  in  the  law,  layeth 
the  weight  of  all  on  him.  *  He  had  done  no  violence,  nei- 
ther was  any  deceit  found  in  his  mouth  ;'  well  then,  it  will 
be  well  with  him  ;  surely  it  shall  be  well  with  the  innocent. 


66  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

no  evil  shall  befall  him;  nay  but  said  he,  ver.  10.  'Yet  it 
pleased  the  Lord  to  bruise  him,  he  hath  put  him  to  grief;' 
yea,  but  what  was  the  reason  of  this?  Why  was  this  the 
will  of  God  ?  why  did  this  seem  good  to  the  just  Judge  of 
all  the  world?  The  reason  is  in  the  very  next  words,  'His 
soul  was  made  an  offering  for  sin,'  which  before  is  expressed 
'  he  bare  our  grief,  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions  ;' 
being  made  liable  to  them  he  was  punished  for  them. 

By  that  which  is  said  it  is  evident  from  this  first  ex- 
pression, or  the  assignation  of  an  action  to  God  in  reference 
to  him,  that  this  death  of  Christ  was  a  punishment,  he  who 
had  power  to  do  it,  bringing  in  him  (on  his  own  voluntary 
offer)  into  the  obligation  to  punishment,  and  inflicting  pu- 
nishment on  him  accordingly. 

The  second  expression  Avhereby  the  same  thing  is  far- 
ther convinced  is  on  the  part  of  him  that  was  punished,  and 
this  in  ver.  4. '  Surely  he  hath  borne  our  griefs,  and  carried 
our  sorrows,'  or  which  is  more  evident,  ver.  11. 'He  shall 
bear  their  iniquities.' 

For  the  right  understanding  of  the  words,  I  shall  give  a 
few  brief  previous  observations,  that  may  give  light  to  the 
matter  we  treat  of.     And  the  first  is, 

1.  That  as  this  whole  thing  was  done  in  the  justice  of 
God,  as  hath  been  declared,  so  it  was  done  by  the  counsel 
and  appointment  of  God.  The  apostles  confess  the  death  of 
Christ  to  have  proceeded  thence  ;  Acts  iv.28.  ii.  23.  Now  as 
laying  of  our  sins  on  Christ,  being  designed  our  mediator, 
and  undertaking  the  work,  was  an  act  of  God,  as  the  gover- 
nor of  all,  and  the  righteous  judge,  so  this  of  the  determi- 
nate counsel,  and  fore-appointment,  or  the  eternal  designa- 
tion of  Christ  to  his  ofiice,  is  an  act  of  sovereign  power  and 
dominion  in  God,  whereby  he  doth  as  he  pleaseth,  accord- 
ing to  the  counsel  of  his  will.  As  he  would  make  the  world 
in  his  sovereign  good  pleasure,  when  he  might  have  other- 
wise done.  Rev.  iv.  11.  so  he  would  determine,  that  Christ 
should  bear  our  iniquities,  when  he  might  otherwise  have 
disposed  of  it,  Rom.  xi.  34 — 37. 

2.  In  respect  of  us,  this  pre-appointment  of  God  was  an 
act  of  grace,  that  is,  a  sovereign  act  of  his  good  pleasure, 
whence  all  good  things,  all  fruits  of  love  whatever  to  us  do 
flow.     Therefore,  it  is  called  love;  John  iii.  16.  and  so  in 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  67 

the  fruit  of  it  is  it  expressed  5  Rom.  viii.  32.  And  on  this 
John  often  insists  in  his  Gospel  and  Epistle  ;  1  John  iv.  9 
— 11.  His  aim  on  his  own  part  was  the  declaration  of  his 
righteousness  ;  Rom.  iii.  25.  and  to  make  way  for  the  praise 
of  his  'glorious  grace,'  Eph.  i.  6.  on  our  parts,  that  we  might 
have  all  those  good  things,  which  are  the  fruits  of  the  most 
intense  love. 

3.  That  Christ  himself  was  willing  to  undergo  this  bur- 
den and  undertake  this  work ;  and  this  as  it  is  consistent 
with  his  death  being  a  punishment,  so  it  is  of  necessity  to 
make  good  the  other  considerations  of  it,  namely,  that  it 
should  be  a  price  and  a  sacrifice.  For  no  man  gives  a  price, 
and  therein  parts  with  that  which  is  precious  to  him  unwill- 
ingly ;  nor  is  a  sacrifice  acceptable  that  comes  not  from  a 
free  and  willing  mind.  That  he  was  thus  willing  himself 
professeth,  both  in  the  undertaking  and  carrying  of  it  on ; 
in  the  undertaking ;  Heb.  x.  9.  '  Lo  I  come  to  do  thy  will 
O  God.'  It  is  the  expression  of  one  breaking  out  with  a 
ready  joy  to  do  the  thing  proposed  to  him.  So  the  church 
of  old  looked  on  him,  as  one  that  came  freely  and  cheer- 
fully. Cant.  ii.  8,  9.  *  It  is  the  voice  of  my  beloved,  behold 
he  cometh  leaping  on  the  mountains,  skipping  on  the  hills  : 
my  beloved  is  like  a  roe,  or  a  young  hart,  he  standeth  be- 
hind the  wall,  he  looketh  forth  at  the  window,  shewing  him- 
self through  the  lattice.'  The  church  looked  on  Christ  as 
yet  at  a  distance  from  the  actual  performance  of  the  work 
he  had  undertaken,  and  so  herself  kept  off  from  that  clear 
and  close  communion  which  she  longed  after,  and  thence 
she  says  of  him,  that  he  '  stood  behind  the  wall,'  that  he 
'looked  forth  at  the  window,  and  shewed  himself  at  the  lat- 
tices.' There  was  a  wall  yet  hindering  the  actual  exhibition 
of  Christ ;  the  '  fulness  of  time  was  not  come.'  The  pur- 
pose of  God  was  not  yet  to  bring  forth ;  but  yet  in  the  mean- 
time, Christ  looked  on  the  church  through  the  window  of 
the  promise,  and  the  lattice  of  the  Levitical  ceremonies. 

And  what  discovery  do  they  make  of  him,  in  the  view 
they  take  in  the  broad  light  of  the  promises,  and  the  many 
glimpses  of  the  ceremonial  types.  They  see  him  coming, 
*  leaping  on  the  mountains,  and  skipping  on  the  hills,' 
coming  speedily  with  a  great  deal  of  joy  and  willingness. 

So  of  himself  he  declares  what  his  mind  was  from  old. 


68  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

from  everlasting;  Prov.  viii.  30,  31.  'Rejoicing  always  be- 
fore him/  that  is,  'before  God  his  Father  ;'  but  in  what  did 
he  rejoice  ?  '  in  the  habitable  parts  of  the  earth,  and  my  de- 
light was  with  the  sons  of  men.'  When  this  joy  of  his  was, 
he  tells  you  ver.  22,  23.  26,  27.  He  rejoiced  before  God  his 
Father  in  the  sons  of  men,  before  they  were  created ;  that 
is,  in  the  work  he  had  to  do  for  them. 

His  will  was  also  in  the  carrying  of  it  on  unto  accom- 
plishment, he  must  be  doing  his  Father's  business,  his  will 
who  sent  him,  Luke  xii.  50.  ttmq  truvEX^juat.  He  was  pained 
as  a  woman  in  travail  to  be  delivered,  to  come  to  be  bap- 
tized in  his  own  blood.  And  when  he  was  giving  himself 
np  to  the  utmost  of  it,  he  professes  his  readiness  to  it,  John 
xviii.  11.  when  Peter  who  once  before  would  have  advised 
him  to  spare  himself,  now  being  his  counsel  was  not  fol- 
lowed, would  have  rescued  him  with  his  sword  ;  as  for  his 
advice  he  was  called  Satan,  so  for  his  profFerred  assistance 
he  is  now  rebuked  ;  and  the  reason  of  it  is  given,  'shall  I  not 
drink  of  the  cup  ?'  It  is  true,  that  it  might  appear,  that  his 
death  v.as  not  a  price,  and  a  sacrifice  only,  but  a  punish- 
ment also,  wherein  there  was  an  immission  of  every  thing 
that  was  evil  to  the  suffering  nature,  and  a  subtraction  of 
that  which  was  good,  he  discovered  that  averseness  to  the 
drinking  of  the  cup,  which  the  truth  of  the  human  nature 
absolutely  required  (and  which  the  amazing  bitterness  of 
the  cup  overpowered  him  withal),  yet  still  his  will  con- 
quered and  prevailed  in  all ;  Matt.  xxvi.  53,  54. 

4.  Christ's  love  was  also  in  it,  his  delight  was  in  the 
sons  of  men  ;  his  love  towards  them  carried  him  out  to  the 
work;  and  Paul  proves  it  by  the  instance  of  himself ;  Gal. 
ii.  20.  'Who  loved  me.'  And  John  applies  the  same  to  all 
believers.  Rev.  i.  5,  6.  'To  him  that  loved  us/  Sec.  And 
thus  was  this  great  work  undertaken. 

These  things  being  premised,  let  us  look  again  to  the 
words  under  consideration. 

1.  For  the  word  he  bare  our  grief,  ver.  4.  it  is  j^ii^l ;  a 
word  of  as  large,  and  as  many  various  acceptions  as  any,  if 
not  absolutely  the  most  extensive  in  the  whole  Hebrew 
tongue.  It  hath  usually  assigned  unto  it  by  the  lexicogra- 
pher eight  or  nine  several  significations  ;  and  to  make  it 
evident,  that  it  is  of  various  acceptions,  it  is  used  (in  the 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  69 

collections  of  Calasius)  eight  hundred  and  eighteen  times 
in  the  Old  Testament,  whereof  not  a  third  part  is  answered 
in  any  language  by  one  and  the  same  word.  With  those 
senses  of  it  that  are  metaphorical  we  have  not  any  thing 
to  do.  That  which  is  the  first,  or  most  proper  sense  of  it 
and  what  is  most  frequently  used,  is  to  '  carry'  or  '  bear/ 
and  by  which  it  is  here  translated  as  in  very  many  other 
places. 

Socinus  would  have  it  here  be  as  much  as  '  abstulit,'  he 
took  away,  so  saith  he, '  God  took  away  our  sin  in  Christ, 
when  by  him  he  declared,  and  confirmed  the  way  whereby 
pardon  and  remission  is  to  be  obtained  ;  as  he  pardoned 
our  sin  in  Christ,  by  discovering  the  new  covenant,  and 
mercy  therein.'  Now  because  the  word  is  of  such  various 
significations,  there  is  a  necessity  that  it  be  interpreted  by 
the  circumstances  of  the  place  where  it  is  used.  And  be- 
cause there  is  not  any  circumstance  of  the  place,  on  the 
account  whereof  the  word  should  be  rendered '  abstulit,'  he 
,took  away,  and  not'tulit,'  he  *  took,' 'bare,'  or'  suffered,'  we 
must  consider  what  arguments  or  reasons  are  scraped  to- 
gether 'aliunde' by  them,  and  then  evince  what  is  the  proper 
signification  of  it,  in  this  place. 

1.  This  very  expression  is  used  of  God  Exod.xxxiv.  7. 
py  «iz;3  '  ferens  iniquitatem,'  as  also  it  is  again  repeated ; 
Numb.  xiv.  18.  In  both  which  places,  we  translate  it  'for- 
giving,' '  forgiving  iniquities,  transgressions,  and  sins.'  Nor 
can  it  be  properly  spoken  of  God,  to  bear  ;  for  God  cannot 
bear,  as  the  word  properly  signifies. 

The  sum  of  the  objection  is ;  the  word  that  is  used  so 
many  times,  and  so  often  mptaphorically,  is  once  or  twice 
in  another  place  used  for  to  take  away,  or  to  pardon  ;  there- 
fore, this  must  be  the  sense  of  it  in  this  place.  God  cannot 
be  said  to  bear  iniquities,  but  only  metaphorically,  and  so 
he  is  often  said  to  bear,  to  be  pressed,  to  be  weary,  and  made 
to  serve  with  them ;  he  is  said  to  bear  our  sins,  in  reference 
to  the  end  of  bearing  any  thing,  which  is  to  carry  it  away ; 
God  in  Christ  taking  away,  pardoning  our  sins,  is  said  to 
bear  them,  because  that  is  the  way  which  sins  are  taken 
away;  they  are  taken  up,  carried,  and  laid  aside.  But  he 
of  whom  these  words  are  spoken  here,  did  bear  properly, 
and  could  do  so,  as  shall  be  shewed. 


70  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF  CHRIST. 

2.  The  interpretation  of  this  place  by  Matthew,  or  the 
application  of  it  is  insisted  on  :  which  is  of  more  importance; 
Matt.  viii.  16,  17.  Christ  curing  the  diseases  of  many,  and 
bodily  sicknesses,  is  said  to '  bear  our  griefs,'  according  as  it 
is  said  in  Isaiah,  that  he  should  do.  Now  he  did  not  bear 
our  diseases,  by  'taking  them  upon  himself,'  and  so  be- 
coming diseased,  but  morally,  in  that  by  his  power  he  took 
them  away  from  them,  in  whom  they  were. 

Not  to  make  many  words,  nor  to  multiply  interpretations 
and  accommodations  of  these  places,  which  may  be  seen  in 
them,  who  have  to  good  purpose  made  it  their  business  to 
consider  the  parallel  places  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
and  to  reconcile  them  :  I  say  only,  it  is  no  new  thing  to 
have  the  effect  and  evidence,  and  end  of  a  thing,  spoken  of 
in  the  New  Testament,  in  answer  to  the  cause,  and  rise  of 
it,  mentioned  in  the  Old,  by  the  application  of  the  same 
words  unto  it  which  they  are  mentioned  in.  For  instance, 
Paul,  Eph.  iv.  8.  citing  that  of  the  psalmist,  Psal.  Ixviii.  18. 
'  Thou  hast  ascended  up  on  high,  and  hast  led  captivity 
captive,  and  received  gifts  for  men  ;'  renders  it, '  when  he 
ascended  up  on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave  gifts 
unto  men  ;'  and  that  because  his  giving  of  them,  was  the 
end  of  his  receiving  of  them  ;  and  his  receiving  of  them, 
the  foundation  of  his  giving  of  them  :  the  effect  and  fruit 
being  here  expressed,  the  foundation  and  ground  supposed. 

So  also, '  Mine  ears  hast  thou  bored,'  Psal.  xl.  is  rendered 
'  a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me,'  Heb.  x.  because  the  end 
of  the  boring  the  ears  of  Christ  was,  that  he  might  offer  his 
body  a  sacrifice  to  God ;  so  it  is  here  in  this  place  of  Mat- 
thew ;  Christ's  taking  away  the  bodily  distempers,  and  sick- 
nesses of  men,  was  an  effect,  and  an  evidence  of  his  taking 
away  their  sin,  which  was  done  by  bearing  of  them.  And 
therefore  Matthew  mentioning  the  effect  and  evidence  of 
the  thing,  doth  it  in  the  words  that  express  the  cause  and 
foundation  of  it.  Not  that  that  was  a  complete  accom- 
plishment of  what  was  foretold,  but  that  it  was  so  demon- 
strated in  the  effect  and  evidence  of  it.  Nor  do  the  Soci- 
nians  themselves  think  that  this  was  a  full  accomplishment 
of  what  is  spoken  by  the  prophet,  themselves  insisting  on 
another  interpretation  of  the  words :  so  that  notwithstanding 
these  exceptions,  the  word  here  may  have  its  proper  signi- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  71 

fication  of  bearing  or  carrying ;  which  also  that  it  hath,  may 
be  farther  evidenced. 

1.  Here  is  no  cogent  reason,  why  the  metaphorical  use 
of  the  word  should  be  understood.  When  it  is  spoken  of 
God,  there  is  a  necessity,  that  it  should  be  interpreted  by  the 
effect ;  because  properly  he  cannot  bear,  nor  undergo  grief, 
sorrow,  or  punishment.  But  as  to  the  Mediator,  the  case 
is  otherwise,  for  he  confessedly  underwent  these  things 
properly,  wherein  we  say  that  this  word,  bearing  of  punish- 
ment, doth  consist;  he  was  so  bruised,  so  broken,  so  slain  ; 
so  that  there  is  no  reason  to  depart  from  the  propriety  of 
the  word. 

2.  Those  who  would  have  the  sense  of  the  word  to  be,  'to 
take  away,' in  this  place,  confess  it  is  by  way  of  the  allusion 
before-mentioned  ;  that  he  that  takes  away  a  thing,  takes  it 
up,  and  bears  it  on  his  shoulders,  or  in  his  arms,  until  he 
lay  it  down;  and  by  virtue  of  this  allusion  doth  it  signify 
to  take  away.  But  why?  seeing  that  taking  up,  and  bearing, 
in  this  place  is  proper,  as  hath  been  shewed,  why  must  that 
be  leaped  over,  and  that  which  is  improper,  and  spoken  by 
way  of  allusion,  be  insisted  on  ? 

3.  It  appears  that  this  is  the  sense  of  the  word,  from  all 
the  circumstances  of  the  text,  and  context.  Take  three  that 
are  most  considerable. 

1.  The  subject  spoken  of,  who  did  thus  bear  our  griefs  ; 
and  this  is  Christ ;  of  whom  such  things  are  affirmed,  in 
answer  to  this  question,  how  did  he  bear  our  griefs  ?  as  will 
admit  of  no  other  sense  :  the  Holy  Ghost  tells  us  how  he 
did  it,  1  Pet.  ii.  24,  25.  '  Who  his  ownself  bare  our  sins  in 
his  body  on  the  tree.'  That  Peter  in  that  place  expressed 
this  part  of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  which  we  insist  upon, 
is  evident ;  the  phrase  at  the  close  of  ver,  24.  and  the  be- 
ginning of  ver.  25.  of  this  chapter  make  it  so  :  they  are  the 
very  words  of  the  end  of  the  5th  and  beginning  of  the  6th 
verses  here  ;  how  then  did  Christ  bear  our  griefs  ?  Why  in 
that '  he  bear  our  sin  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree.' 

I  shall  not  insist  on  the  precise  signification  of  the  word 
ava(^igh),  here  used,  as  though  it  expressed  the  outward 
manner  of  that  suffering  of  Christ  for  sin,  when  he  was  hfted 
up  on  the  cross  or  tree.  It  is  enough,  that  our  sins  were  on 
him,  his  body ;  that  is,  his  whole  human  nature  (by  a 
usual  synecdoche),  when  he  was  on  the  tree;  that  he  did  it 


72  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST, 

when  he  suffered  in  the'flesh,  cap.  iv.  1.  He  that  did  so 
bear  our  grief,  sin,  and  iniquities,  as  to  have  them  in  his  own 
body,  when  he  suffered  in  the  flesh,  he  is  said  properly  therein 
'tulisse,'  not  'abstulisse,'  to  'have  borne,'  not  'taken  away' 
our  griefs.  But  that  this  is  the  case,  in  Christ's  bearing 
our  grief,  the  Holy  Ghost  doth  thus  manifest. 

£.  The  manner  how  Christ  bare  them  evidently  mani- 
festeth,  in  what  sense  this  expression  is  to  be  understood. 
He  so  bare  them,  that  in  doing  so,  *  he  was  wounded  and 
bruised,  grieved,  chastised,  slain/  as  it  is  at  large  expressed 
in  the  context.  Christ  bare  our  grief,  so  as  in  doing  of  it, 
to  be  wounded,  broken,  grieved,  killed,  which  is  not  to  take 
them  away,  but  really  to  bear  them  upon  himself. 

3.  The  cause  of  this  bearing  our  grief,  is  assigned  to  be 
sin ;  '  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,'  as  was  shewn 
before :  now  this  cannot  be  the  sense,  for  our  sins,  he  took 
them  away  ;  but  for  our  sins,  he  bare  the  punishment  due 
to  them,  2  Cor.  v.  21. 

4.  To  put  all  out  of  question,  the  Holy  Ghost  in  this 
chapter  useth  another  word  in  the  same  matter,  with  this, 
that  will  admit  of  no  other  sense,  than  that  which  is  proper. 
And  that  is  ^no  v.  11.  b2D>  Nin  dDDiiJ/l  '  He  shall  bear  their 
iniquities  :'  and  it  is  used  immediately  after  this  we  have 
insisted  on,  as  explicative  of  it ;  and  *  carried  our  sorrows  :' 
now  as  HWi  properly  signifies  to  *  lift,'  to  take  up  that  which 
a  man  may  carry,  so  ^2D  signifies  to  bear,  and  undergo  the 
burden,  that  is  taken,  or  that  a  man  hath  laid  on  his 
shoulders.  And  Matthew  hath  rendered  this  word  by 
(daardtlii),  tclq  voaovg  f/Baoraaev,  that  is  '  bajulo,  porto ;'  to 
bear  a  thing,  as  a  man  doth  a  burden  on  his  shoulders  ;  nor 
is  it  once  used  in  the  Scriptures,  but  it  is  either  properly  to 
bear  a  burden,  or  metaphorically  from  thence,  to  undergo 
that  which  is  heavy  and  burdensome  ;  thus  did  Christ  bear 
our  griefs,  our  iniquities,  by  putting  his  shoulder  under  them, 
taking  them  on  himself. 

2.  What  did  he  thus  bear?  our  griefs,  our  sins ;  or  our 
iniquities,  our  sins.  Let  us  see  by  a  second  instance,  what 
it  is  in  the  language  of  God,  *To  bear  iniquities,'  and  this 
argument  will  be  at  an  issue.  Lament,  v.  7.  '  Our  fathers 
have  sinned,  and  are  not,  and  we  have  borne  their  iniquities.' 
'We  have  borne  their  iniquities,'  or  the  punishment  that  was 
due  to  them;  'They  are  not,'    they   are  gone  out   of  the 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  73 

world,  before  the  day  of  recompense  came,  and  we  lie  under 
the  punishment  threatened  and  inflicted  for  their  sins,  and 
our  own.  Distinctly, 

1.  Men  are  said   to  bear  their   own  sin,   Levit.  xix.  5. 

*  every  one  that  eateth  it  shall  bear  his  iniquity  ;'  that  is,  he 
shall   be  esteemed  guilty,  and  be   punished  :  Levit.  xx.  17. 

*  He  shall  bear  his  iniquity,'  is  the  same  with  '  he  shall  be 
killed,' ver.  16.  'and  he  shall  be  cut  off  from  his  people;' 
ver.  18.  For  a  man  to  bear  his  iniquity,  is  constantly  for  him 
to  answer  the  guilt,  and  undergo  the  punishment  due  to  it. 

2.  So  also  of  the  sins  of  others;  Numb.  xiv.  33.  '  And 
your  children  shall  wander  in  the  wilderness  forty  years,  and 
shall  bear  your  whoredoms  :  bear  you,  whoredoms  ;'  that  is, 
my  anger  for  them,  and  the  punisliment  due  to  them ; 
Numb.  XXX.  15.  He  that  compels  by  his  power  and  autho- 
rity another  to  break  a  vow,  shall  himself  be  liable  to  the 
punishment  due  to  such  a  breach  of  vow.  Ezek.  xviii.  20.  is 
an  explanation  of  all  these  places ;  '  The  soul  that  sins  it 
shall  die,'  it  shall  be  punished  ;  'The  son  shall  not  bear  the 
iniquity  of  the  father,'  &,c.  The  son  shall  not  be  punished 
for  the  sin  of  the  father  :  nor  the  father  for  the  sin  of  the 
son.  In  brief,  this  expression,  to  bear  iniquities,  is  never 
otherwise  used  in  Scripture,  but  only  for  to  undergo  the 
punishment  due  thereunto. 

Thus  much  then  we  have  clearly  evinced.  God  did  so 
lay  our  sins  on  Christ,  as  that  he  bare  and  underwent  that 
which  was  due  to  them;  God  inflicting  it  on  him,  and  he 
willingly  undergoing  it.  Which  is  my  second  demonstration 
from  this  place,  that  the  death  of  Christ  is  also  a  punishment. 
Which  is  all  that  I  shall  urge  to  that  purpose.  And  this  is 
that,  and  all  that  we  intend,  by  the  satisfaction  of  Christ. 

But  now  having  laid  so  great  stress  as  to  our  doctrine, 
under  demonstration  upon  this  place  of  the  prophet,  and 
finding  some  attempting  to  take  away  our  foundation,  before 
I  proceed,  I  shall  divert  to  the  consideration  of  the  anno- 
tations of  Grotius  on  this  whole  chapter,  and  rescue  it  from 
his  force  and  violence,  used  in  contending  to  make  what  is 
here  spoken  to  suit  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  and  to  intend 
him  in  the  first  place  :  to  establish  which  vain  conjecture, 
he  hath  perverted  the  sense  of  the  whole,  and  of  every  parti- 
cular verse,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  this  prophecy. 

VOL.  IX.  G 


74  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 


CHAP.  XXV. 

A  digression  concerning  the  fifty -third  chapter  of  Isaiah:  and  the 
vindication  of  it  from  the  perverse  interpretation  of 

HUGO  GROTIUS. 

This  chapter  is  well  by  some  termed  Carnificina  Tlabbiao- 
rum;  a  place  of  Scripture  that  sets  them  on  the  rack;  and 
makes  them  turn  themselves  all  ways  possible  to  escape  the 
torture,  which  he  puts  their  unbelieving  hearts  unto.  Not 
long  since  a  worthy  and  very  learned  friend  told  me,  that 
speaking  with  Manasseh  Ben  Israel  at  Amsterdam,  and 
urging  this  prophecy  unto  him,  he  ingenuously  told  him, 
Profecto  locus  iste  magnum  scandalum  dedit ;'  to  whom  the 
other  replied;  'Recte,  quia  Christus  vobis  lapis  scandali 
est.'  Hulsius,  the  Hebrew  professor  at  Breda,  professes  that 
some  Jews  told  him,  that  their  Rabbins  could  easily  have 
extricated  themselves  from  all  other  places  of  the  prophets, 
if  Isaiah  in  this  place  had  but  held  his  peace.  '  Huls.^The- 
olog.  Judaic,  lib.  1.  part.  2.  Diet.  Sapp.  de  Tempor.  Mes- 
siae.'  Though  I  value  not  their  boasting  of  their  extricating 
themselves  from  the  other  prophesies,  knowing  that  they  are 
no  less  entangled  with  that  of  Daniel,  chap.  ix.  (Of  which 
there  is  an  eminent  story*"  in  Franzius,  de  Sacrificiis,  concern- 
ing his  dispute  with  a  learned  ,Jew  on  that  subject):  yet  it 
appears,  that  by  this,  they  are  confessedly  extricated  beyond 
all  hope  of  evading,  until  they  divest  themselves  of  their 
cursed  hypothesis. 

Hence  it  is  that  with  so  much  greediness  they  scraped 
together  all  the  copies  of  Abrabaniel's  comment  on  this 
chapter;  so  that  it  was  very  hard  for  a  Christian,  a  long 
time  to  get  a  sight  of  it ;  as  Constantine  1'  Empereur  ac- 
quaints us  in  his'=  preface  to  his  refutation  of  it :  because 

^  Aliqui  Judffii  mihi  confessi  sunt,  Rabbinos  suos  ex  Propheticis  Scripturis  facile 
se  extricare  potuisse,  inodo  Isaias  tacuisset. 

•>  Disput.  decima,  de  saciificiorum  duratione,Thes.82 — 84.  &c. 

c  Abrabiniel  tani  avidc  a  Judais  passim  coiiquiritur,  ut  vix  tandem  ejus  compos 
fieri  potiierim.  Nam  eum  Christiani  supcrioreiii  putant:  qui  solideeorum  argunienta 
&c.  Constant.  1'  Emper.  Prolog,  ad  Lectorem:  praefix.  Com.  Abrab.  in  cap.  33.  Is. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  75 

they  thought  themselves  in  some  measure  instructed  by  him, 
to  avoid  the  arguments  of  the  Christians  from  hence,  by  his 
application  of  the  whole  to  Josiah  :  and  I  must  needs  say 
he  hath  put  as  good,  yea,  a  far  better  colour  of  probability 
upon  his  interpretation,  than  he  with  whom  I  have  to  do, 
hath  done  on  his. 

How  ungrateful  then,  and  how  unacceptable  to  all  profes- 
sors of  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  must  the  labours  of  Grotius 
needs  be;  who  hath  to  the  utmost  of  his  power  reached  out 
his  hand  to  rslieve  the  poor  blind  creatures  from  their  rack 
and  torture,  by  applying  (though  successlessly)  this  whole 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  casting  himself  into  the  same  entan- 
glements with  them,  not  yielding  them  indeed  the  least  re- 
lief, is  easily  to  conjecture.  And  this  is  not  a  little  aggra- 
vated, in  that  the  Socinians  who  are  no  less  racked  and  tor- 
tured with  this  Scripture  than  the  Jews,  durst  never  yet 
attempt  to  accommodate  the  things  here  spoken  of  to  any 
other;  though  they  have  expressed  a  desire  of  so  doing; 
and  which  if  they  could  compass,  they  would  free  themselves 
from  the  sharpest  sword  that  lies  at  the  throat  of  their  cause; 
seeing,  if  it  is  certain,  that  the  things  here  mentioned  may  be 
applied  to  any  other,  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  cannot  from 
them  be  confirmed.  This  digression  then,  is  to  cast  into  the 
fire  that  broken  crutch,  which  this  learned  man  hath  lent 
unto  the  Jews  and  Socinians  to  lean  upon,  and  keep  them- 
selves from  sinking  under  their  unbelief. 

To  discover  the  rise  of  that  learned  man's  opinion,  that 
Jeremiah  is  intended  in  this  prophecy,  the  conceits  of  the 
Jewish  Doctors  may  a  little  be  considered,  who  are  divided 
amongst  themselves  ;  the  ancient  doctors  generally  conclude, 
that  it  is  the  Messiah,  who  is  here  intended, '  behold  my  ser- 
vant the  Messiah  shall  prosper,'  says  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast 
upon  the  place.  And  Constant! us  1'  Empereur  tells  from** 
R.  Simeon,  in  his  book  Salkout,  that  the  ancient  Rabbins, 
in  their  ancient  book  Tancluma,  and  higher,  were  of  the 
same  judgment.  Rabbi  Moses  Alscheth  is  urged  to  the 
same  purpose  at  large  by  Hulsius.     And  in  his  comment  on 

^  Porro  libri  istius,  unde  liEc  sectio  in  Esaiaiii  dcsiinipfa  est,  Author  perliibetur 
D.  Simeon,  concionatoruni  princcps.qui  Francofiirti  olim  degcbat.  Hie  e  Jiida-orurn 
vetustissin-.is  Scriptis,  secundum  bibliorum  serieui,  dicta  et  explicationes  plurinias : 
magna  diligentia  et  iabore  collegit:  undo  libre  suo  noincu  is-bt  ac  si  pcrain  dicas: 
quia  lit  ill  pera  reconduntur  plurima:  1'  Eiiiper. 

G    2 


76  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

this  place  he  says  expressly,  *  Ecce  doctores  nostri  laiidatas 
meraoriai  uno  ore  statuunt,  et  a  majoribus  acceperunt,de  rege 
Messia  sermouem  esse,  et  doctorum  L,  M.  vestigiis  insiste- 
mns.'  And  one  passage  iu  him  is  very  admirable,  in  the 
same  place,  saith  he  ;  '  Dicunt  Doctores  nostri  L.  M.  omni- 
um afflictionum  qu33  mnndum  ingressee  sunt,  tertia  pars  Da- 
vidi  et  patriarchis  obtigit:  tertia  altera  seculo  excisionis, 
ultima  tertia  pars  regi  Messise  incumbet.'  Where  he  urgeth 
the  common  consent  of  their  doctors  for  the  sufferings  of 
the  Messiah.  Of  the  same  mind  was  R.  Solomon,  as  he  is 
cited  by  Pctrus  Galatinus,  lib.  8.  cap.  14.  As  the  same  is 
affirmed  by  the  Misdrach  Resh.  cap.  2.  14.  And  in  Bere- 
sheth  Rabba  'on  Gen.  xxiv.  as  is  observed  by  Raimundus 
Martin.  Pug.  fidei  3.  p.  Dist.  1.  cap.  10.  So  that  before  these 
men  grew  impudent  and  crafty  in  corrupting  and  perverting 
the  testimonies  of  the  Old  Testament,  concerning  the  Mes- 
siah, they  generally  granted  him,  and  only  him,  to  be  here 
intended,  it  was  not  for  want  of  company  then,  that  Gro- 
tius  took  in  with  the  modern  Rabbins,  who  being  mad  with 
envy  and  malice  care  not  what  they  say,  so  they  may  oppose 
Jesus  Christ. 

2.  Many  of  the  following  Jewish  doctors  interpret  this 
place  of  the  whole  people  of  the  Jews.  And  this  way  go  the 
mi:n,  who  are  of  the  greatest  note  amongst  them  in  these 
latter  days  ;  as  R.  D.  Kimchi,  Aben  Ezra,  Abarbiniel,  Lip- 
man,  with  what  weak  and  mean  pretences,  with  what  incon- 
sistency as  to  the  words,  of  the  text,  hath  been  by  others 
manifested. 

3.  Abrabinel,  or  Abrabaniel,a  man  of  great  note  and  ho- 
nour amongst  them,  though  he  assents  to  the  former  expo- 
sition of  applying  the  whole  prophecy  to  the  people  of  the 
Jews,  and  interprets  the  words  at  large  accordingly,  which 
exposition  is  confuted  by  Constantine  I'Empereur,  yet  he 
inclines  to  a  singular  opinion  of  his  own,  that  Josiah  is  the 
man  pointed  at,  and  described  :  but  he  is  the  first  and  last, 
that  abides  by  that  interpretation. 

4.  Grotius  interprets  the  words  of  Jeremiah  in  the  first 
place;  not  denying  them  (as  we  shall  see)  to  have  an  ac- 
commodation to  Christ.  In  this  he  hath  the  company  of 
one  Rabbi;  R.  Saadias  Gaon,  mentioned  by  Aben  Ezra  upon 
the  52d  chap,  of  this  prophecy,  ver.   13.     But  this  fancy  of 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CIIUIST.  77 

Saadias  is  fully  confuted  by  Abarblnel :  which  words  be- 
cause they  sufficiently  evert  the  whole  design  of  Grotius 
also,  I  shall  transcribe  as  they  lie  in  the  translation  of'  Hul- 
sius.  Revera  ne  unum  quidera  versiculum  video,  qui  de  Je- 
remiah exponi  possit:  qua  ratione  de  eo  dicetur,  Extolletur 
et  altus  erit  valde?  Item  illud,  propter  eum  obdent  reges  os 
suum,  nam  astas  ilia  prophetas  habere  consueverat.  Quo- 
modo  etiam  dici  potest  morbos  nostros  portasse,  et  dolores 
nostros  bajulasse,  et  in  tumice  ejus  curationeni  nobis  esse, 
Deum  in  ipsum  incurrere  fecisse  peccata  omnium  nostrum: 
quasi  ipsi  posna  incubuisset,  et  Israel  fuisset  immunis.  Jam 
illud,  propter  peccatuni  populi  mei  plaga  ipsis,  item,  dedit 
cumimprobis  sepulcrum  ejus, ad  ipsum  referri  nequit;  multo 
minus  illud,  videbit  semen,  prolongabit  dies,  item,  cum  ro- 
bustis  partietur  spolium.  In  quibus  omnibus  nihil  est  quod 
de  ipso  commode  affirmari  possit.  Unde  vehementer  miror, 
quomodo  H.  liagaon  in  banc  sententiani  perduci  potuerit, 
et  sapientes  dari  qui  banc  expositionem  laudant  :  cum  ta- 
men  tota  ista  exponendi  ratio  plane  aliena  sit,  et  e  Scriptura 
non  facta.' 

Now  certainly  if  this  Jew  thought  he  had  sufficient  cause 
to  admire,  that  the  blind  Rabbi  should  thus  wrest  the  sense 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  that  anywise  man  should  be  so  fool- 
ish as  to  commend  it :  we  cannot  but  be  excused,  in  admir- 
ing that  any  man  professing  himself  a  Christian,  should  in- 
sist in  his  steps,  and  that  any  should  commend  him  for  so 
doing. 

Tliat,  therefore,  which  here  is  affirmed,  in  the  entrance  of 
his  discourse  by  Abarbinel,  namely,  that  not  one  vevse  can, 
or  may,  be  expounded  of  Jeremiah,  shall  now  particularly  be 
made  good  against  Grotius. 

1.  He  confesseth  with  us,  that  the  head  of  this  prophecy 
and  discourse  is  in  ver.  13.  chap.  52.  The  words  of  that 
verse  are, 

'  Behold  my  servant  shall  deal  prudently  :  he  shall  be 
exalted  and  extolled,  and  be  very  high.' 

Of  the  sense  of  which  words,  thus  he  : 

*  Ecce  intelliget  servus  mens]  Haic  omnia  clarissime  re- 
velata  cognoscet  Jeremiah.  Exaltabitur  et  elevabitur  et 
sublimis  erit  valde.]  In  magnohonore  erit  apud  ipsos  Chal- 
da^os,  Jereni.  39.  chap.  v.  40.      My  servant  Jeremiah  shall 


78  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

have  all  these  things  clearly  revealed  to  him,  and  he  shall 
be  in  great  honour  with  the  Chaldeans.'    So  he, 

First,  for  the  words  themselves  :  b>y\l!>  with  the  Vulgar 
Latin,  he  renders  'intelliget,'  shall  'understand/  The  word 
signifies  rather  '  prudence'  for  action  with  success,  than  any- 
speculative  knowledge  by  revelation  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  30.  it  is 
used  of  David  behaving  himself  wisely  in  the  business  of  his 
military  and  civil  employment.  Its  opposite,  saith  Pflg^^fw, 
is  ^3D  (' quod  incogitantiam  significat  in  rebus  agendis  et 
ignavam  levitatem')  which  signifies  '  incogitancy  in  the  ma- 
nagement of  affairs,  and  idle  lightness,'  Whence  the  word 
is  usually  taken  for  to  *  prosper'  in  affairs,  as  it  is  used  of 
our  Saviour,  Jerem.  xxiii.  5.  *  a  king  shall  reign'  ^Dti^m  and 
*  prosper.'  Nor  can  it  be  otherwise  used  here,  considering 
the  connexion  of  the  words  wherein  it  stands :  it  being  the 
precedent  to  his  being  'highly  exalted'  who  is  spoken  of; 
which  rather  follows  his  'dealing  prudently,'  than  his  're- 
ceiving revelations.'  So  that  in  the  very  entrance  there  is 
a  mistake  in  the  sense  of  the  word,  and  that  mistake  lies  at 
the  bottom  of  the  whole  interpretation. 

2.  I  deny  that  God  speaks  any  where  in  the  Scripture  of 
any  one  besides  Jesus  Christ  in  this  phrase,  without  any  ad- 
dition, '  my  servant ;'  as  here,  '  Behold  my  servant.'  So  he 
speaks  of  Christ,  chap.  xlii.  1.  19.  and  other  places;  but 
not  of  any  other  person  whatever.  It  is  an  expression  kut 
l^oxnv,  and  not  to  be  applied  to  any,  but  to  him,  who  was 
the  great  servant  of  the  Father,  in  the  work  of  mediation. 

3.  Even  in  respect  of  revelations,  there  is  no  ground  why 
those  made  to  Jeremiah,  should  be  spoken  of  so  emphati- 
cally, and  by  way  of  eminence  above  others  ;  seeing  he 
came  short  of  the  prophet,  by  whom  these  words  are  written. 
Nor  can  any  instance  be  given  of  such  a  prediction  used 
concerning  any  prophet  whatever,  that  was  to  be  raised  up 
in  the  church  of  the  Jews  ;  but  of  Christ  himself  only. 

4.  The  exposition  of  the  close  of  these  words,  'he  shall 
be  ^exalted  and  extolled,  and  be  very  high'  (the  great  ex- 
altation of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  his  kingdom,  when  he 
was  made  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  in  a  most  eminent  manner, 
being  set  forth  in  various  expressions,  no  one  reaching  to  the 

^  Etuinenliac  n<)ti(jiicni  (luavifsforimilaexprcssit.tniiailljus  ciniiitiitia  eiit  subiiiuii  ' 
excelkiilia  eiit  subliiuis  cxcellentia.  D.  Kinichi. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  79 

glory  of  it);  is  unworthy  the  learned  annotator.  *He  shall 
be  exalted  and  extolled,  and  be  very  high  ;'  that  is,  the 
Chaldeans  shall  give  him  'victuals'  and  a  'reward  ;'  Jer.  xl.  5. 
and  after  awhile,  he  shall  be  carried  a  prisoner  into  Egypt, 
and  there  knocked  on  the  head  :  such  was  the  exaltation 
of  the  poor  prophet.  What  resemblance  hath  all  this,  to 
the  exaltation  of  Jesus  Christ,  whom  the  learned  man  con- 
fesseth  to  be  intended  in  these  words. 

The  sense  then  of  these  words  is,  'Jesus  Christ  the  Mes- 
siah, the  servant  of  the  Father,'  Isa.  xlii.  1.19.  Phil.  ii.  7,  8. 
*  shall  deal  prudently/  and  prosper  in  the  business  of  doing 
his  Father's  will,  and  carrying  on  the  affairs  of  his  own  king- 
dom ;'  Isa.  ix.  7.  '  And  be  exalted  far  above  all  principalities 
and  powers,  having  a  name  given  him  above  every  name, 
that  at  the  name  Jesus,'  &c.  Phil.  ii.  7,  8. 

The  next  verse  is, 

*  As  many  were  astonished  at  thee,  his  visage  was  so 
marred,  more  than  any  man,  and  his  form  more  than  the  sons 
of  men.' 

Of  the  accomplishment  of  this,  in  and  upon  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  there  is  no  difficulty.  The  astonislunent  men- 
tioned is  that  of  men,  at  his  low,  and  despicable  condition 
as  to  outward  appearance ;  which  was  such,  as  that  he  said 
of  himself,  '  he  was  a  worm  and  no  man,'  Ps.  xxii.  His  con- 
dition was  such,  and  his  visage  such,  as  all  that  knew  any 
thing  of  him,  were  astonished  to  the  purpose.  The  marring 
of  his  visage  and  form,  as  it  may  point  out  all  the  acts  of 
violence,  that  were  done  upon  his  face,  by  spitting,  buffetting, 
and  the  like;  so  they  express  his  whole  despised,  contemned, 
persecuted  estate  and  condition.  But  let  us  attend  to  our 
annotator.  ^ 

'  Modo  secunda,  modo  tertia  persona  de  Jeremia  lo- 
quitur, quod  frequens  Hebrseis.  Sicut  mulli  mirati  erant 
hominem  tam  egregium  tarn  fsede  tractari,  in  carcerem  de- 
trudi,  deinde  in  lacum  lutosum,  ibique ;  et  psedore  et  cibi 
inopia  tabescere.  Sic  contra,  rebus  mutatis,  admiration! 
erit  honos  ipsi  habitus.'  '  He  speaks  of  Jeremiah,  sometimes 
in  the  second,  sometimes  in  the  third  person,  which  is  fre- 
quent with  the  Hebrews.  As  many  wondered  that  so  ex- 
cellent a  person  should  so  vilely  be  dealt  with,  be  thrust  into 
prison,  and  then  into  a  miry  lake,  and  there   to  pine  with 


80  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF   CHRIST. 

stink,  and  want  of  food.  So  on  the  contrary,  affairs  being 
changed,  the  honour  afforded  him  shall  be  matter  of  admira- 
tion.' 

1.  To  gi'ant  the  first  observation,  as  to  the  change  of 
personsinthe  discourse,  theword  (T?3nti'  'shallbe astonished') 
here  used,  signifies  not  every  slight  admiration,  by  wonder- 
ing upon  any  occasion,  or  that  may  be  a  little  more  than  or- 
dinary :  but  mostly,  an  astonishment  arising  from  the  con- 
templation of  some  ruthful  spectacle.  So  Levit.  xxvi.  32. 
'  I  will  bring  the  land  into  desolation,  and  the  enemies  which 
dwell  therein,  shall  be  astonished  at  it;'  and  the  word  is 
near  twenty  times  used  to  the  same  purpose.  This  by  way 
of  diminution  is  made,  *  mirati  sunt,  admirationi  erit.' 

2.  This  astonishment  of  men,  is  by  Grotius  referred  both 
to  the  dejection  and  exaltation  of  Jeremiah,  whereof  there  is 
nothing  in  the  words.  It  is  the  amazement  of  men,  at  the 
despicable  condition  of  him,  that  is  spoken  of,  only,  that  is 
intended  ;  but  without  intruding  something  of  his  exaltation, 
this  discourse  had  wanted  all  colour  or  pretext. 

3.  Was  it  so  great  a  matter  in  Jerusalem,  that  a  prophet 
should  be  put  in  prison  there,  where  they  imprisoned,  stoned, 
tortured,  and  slew  them  almost  all,  one  after  another,  in 
their  several  generations,  that  it  should  be  thus  prophesied 
of,  as  a  thing  that  men  would,  and  should  be  amazed  at? 
Was  it  any  wonder  at  all  in  that  city,  whose  streets  not 
long  before,  had  run  with  the  blood  of  innocent  men,  that  a 
prophet  should  be  cast  into  prison?  Or  was  this  peculiar 
to  Jeremiah  to  be  dealt  so  withal  ?  Is  it  any  matter  of  as- 
tonishment to  this  very  day  ?  Was  his  honour  afterward, 
such  an  amazing  thing,  in  that  for  a  little  season  he  was 
suffered  to  go  at  liberty,  and  had  victuals  given  him?  Was 
not  this,  as  to  the  thing  itself,  common  to  him  with  many 
hundred  others?  Were  his  afflictions  such,  as  to  be  beyond 
compare  with  those  of  any  man,  or  any  of  the  sons  of  men? 
Or  his  honours  such  as  to  dazzle  the  eyes  of  men  with  ad- 
miration and  astonishment?  Let  a  man  dare  to  make  bold 
with  the  word  of  God,  and  he  may  make  as  many  such  appli- 
cations as  he  pleaseth,  and  find  out  what  person  he  will,  to 
answer  all  the  prophecies  of  the  Messiah.  This  not  suc- 
ceeding, let  us  try  the  next  verse. 

^  So  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations  ;  the  kings  shall  shut 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CIIRIST.  81 

tlieir  mouths  at  him  ;  for  that  which  had  not  been  told  them, 
shall  they  see,  and  that  which  they  had  notheard,  shall  they 
consider.' 

*  Ita  asperget  gentes  multas,'  in  Hebro  '  sic  asperget ;' 
'  ut  respondeat  illi  sicut,  quod  prjscessit.  Multos  ex  gen- 
tibus  ab  idolorum  cultu  avertet.  Similitudo  sumpta  ab  as- 
persionibus  legalibus;  unde  et  Chaldeeis  nr3  est  objurgari. 
At  LXX  habent  ovtm  ^avf-iaaovrai  t^vt)  iroXXa  IttI  civtm'  noii 
male,  nam  mirari  est  aspergi  fulgore  alicujus.'  '  In  the  He- 
brew it  is.  So  he  shall  sprinkle,  that  it  might  answer  to 
the  '  As'  that  went  before.  He  shall  turn  many  of  the  na- 
tions from  the  worship  of  idols.  A  similitude  taken  from 
the  legal  washings  :  whence  nfJ  with  the  Chaldees  is  to  '  re- 
buke.' The  LXX  render  it,  '  So  shall  many  nations  wonder 
at  him :'  not  badly.  For  to  wonder  is  as  it  were,  to  be 
sprinkled  with  any  one's  brightness.' 

For  the  exposition  of  the  words  ; 

1.  We  agree  that  it  is, '  So  he  shall  sprinkle  :'  an  cnroEo)- 
dig,  relating  to  the  Trporaaig,  ver.  14.  'As  many  were  aston- 
ished,' &c.  The  great  work  of  Christ,  and  his  exaltation 
therein,  being  rendered  in  opposition  to  his  humiliation  and 
dejection  before-mentioned.  As  he  was  in  so  mean  a  con- 
dition, that  men  were  astonished  at  him,  so  he  shall  be  ex- 
alted in  his  great  work  of  converting  the  nations  to  their 
admiration. 

2.  It  is  granted  that  the  expression,  '  he  shall  sprinkle,' 
is  an  allusion  to  the  legal  washings  and  purifications,  which 
as  they  were  typical  of  real  sanctification  and  holiness  ;  so 
from  them  is  the  promise  thereof  so  often  expressed  in  the 
terms  of  'washing'  and  'cleansing,'  Ezek.  xxxvi.  26,27. 
the  term  being  preserved  and  used  in  the  New  Testament 
frequently  ;  the  blood  of  Christ,  whereby  this  work  is  done, 
being  therefore  called  the  '  blood  of  sprinkling ;'  Eph.  v. 
25,  26.  Heb.  ix.  14.  The  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  by  Jesus 
Christ,  for  the  purifying  and  sanctifying  of  many  nations, 
not  the  Jews  only,  but  the  children  of  God  throughout 
the  world,  by  faith  in  his  blood,  is  that  which  is  here  in- 
tended. What  the  use  of  nfl  in  the  Chaldee  to  this  purpose 
is,  I  know  not. 

3.  The  LXX  have  very  badly  rendered  the  words, '  many 


S2  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

nations  shall  wonder  at  him  ;'  both  as  to  words  and  sense. 
For  1.  as  the  words  will  not  bear  it ;  so  2,  they  make  that 
the  action  of  the  nations  towards  Christ,  which  is  his  to- 
wards them.  They  lose  the  whole  sense  of  the  words,  and 
what  they  say,  falls  in  with  what  follows,  and  is  clearly  ex- 
pressed. 3.  It  is  not  helped  by  the  explanation  given  to  it  by 
the  annotator.  The  first  expression  is  metaphorical,  which 
the  LXX  render  by  a  word  proper,  remote  from  the  sense 
intended,  which  the  annotator  explains  by  another  metaphor. 
By  which  kind  of  procedure,  men  may  lead  words  and  senses 
whither  and  which  way  they  please. 

4.  For  the  accommodation  of  the  words  to  Jeremiah  ; 
how  did  he  sprinkle  many  nations ;  so  as  to  answer  the 
type  of  legal  cleansing?  Did  he  pour  out  the  Spirit  upon 
them  ?  Did  he  sanctify,  and  make  them  holy  ?  Did  he  purge 
them  from  their  iniquities?  But  he  turned 'many  amongst 
the  nations,  from  the  worship  of  idols.'  But  who  told 
Grotius  so  ?  Where  is  it  written  or  recorded  ?  He  pro- 
phesied indeed  of  the  desolation  of  idols  and  idolaters.  Of 
the  conversion  of  many,  of  any  among  the  heathen  by  his 
preaching,  he  being  not  purposely  sent  to  them,  what 
evidence  have  we?  If  a  man  may  feign  what  he  please,  and 
affix  it  to  whom  he  please,  he  may  make  whom  he  will  to  be 
foretold  in  any  prophecy. 

'Kino's  shall  shut  their  mouth  at  him.  Reo-es,  ut  Ne- 
buchodonosor  ChaklEeorum,  et  Nechos  yEgyptiorum,  eorum- 
que  satrapse  admirabuntur  cum  silentio,  ubi  videbunt  omnia, 
quae  dixit  Jeremias  ad  amussim  et  suis  temporibus  impleta.' 
'Kings,  as  Nebuchodonosor  of  the  Chaldees,  and  Necho  of 
the  Egyptians,  and  their  princes,  shall  admire  with  silence, 
when  they  shall  see  all  things  foretold  by  Jeremiah  come  to 
pass  exactly,  and  to  be  fulfilled  in  their  own  time.' 

That  by  this  expression,  wonder  and  amazement  is  in- 
tended, is  agreed  :  as  men,  all  sorts  of  men  before  were  as- 
tonished at  his  low  condition  ;  so  even  the  greatest  of  them 
shall  be  astonished  at  the  prosperity  of  his  work  and  exalta- 
tion. The  reason  of  this  their  shutting  their  mouths  in  si- 
lence and  admiration,  is,  from  the  work  which  he  shall  do  ; 
that  is,  he  shall  sprinkle  many  nations ;  as  is  evident  from 
the  following  reason  assigned  :  *fnr  that  which  hath  not  been 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  83 

told  them,  shall  they  see  ;'  which  expresseth  the  means 
whereby  he  should  *  sprinkle  many  nations,'  even  by  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel  to  their  conversion. 

For  the  application  hereof  to  Jeremiah.  1 .  That  the  kings 
mentioned  did  so  become  silent  with  admiration  at  him  and 
astonishment,  is  dypacpov :  and  all  these  magnificent  thoughts 
of  the  Chaldeans  dealing  with  Jeremiah,  is  built  only  on  this  ; 
that  looking  on  him,  as  a  man  that  had  dissuaded  the  Jews 
from  their  rebellion  against  them,  and  rebuked  all  their 
wickedness,  and  foretold  their  ruin,  they  gave  him  his  life 
and  liberty.  2.  The  reason  assigned  by  Grotius,  why  they 
should  so  admire  him,  is  for  his  predictions  :  but  the  reason 
of  the  great  amazement  and  astonishment  at  him,  in  the  text, 
is  his  sprinkling  of  many  nations :  so  that  nothing,  not  a 
word  or  expression,  doth  here  agree  to  him.  Yea  this  gloss 
is  directly  contrary  to  the  letter  of  the  text. 

The  close  of  these  words  is  ;  'That  which  had  not  been 
told  them  shall  they  see,  and  that  which  they  had  not  heard, 
shall  they  consider.'  Of  which  he  says,  '  They  shall  see  that 
come  to  pass,  foreseen  and  foretold  by  him,  which  they  had 
not  heard  of  by  their  astrologers  or  magicians.' 

1,  But  what  is  it,  that  is  here  intended  ?  The  desolation  of 
Jerusalem.  That  was  it  which  Jeremiah  foretold ;  upon  the 
account  whereof  he  had  that  respect  with  the  Chaldees, 
which  through  the  mercy  of  God  he  obtained.  Is  this  that 
which  is  thus  emphatically  expressed  ;  'That  which  they  had 
not  heard,  that  which  they  had  not  been  told,  this  they  should 
see,  this  they  should  consider.'  That  this  is  directly  spoken 
of  Jesus  Christ,  that  he  is  the  thing  which  they  had  not  seen, 
or  heard  of,  the  apostle  tells  us,  Rom.  xv.  21.  Strange  that 
this  should  be  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem.  2.  It  is  probable 
that  the  magicians  and  astrologers,  whose  life  and  trade  it 
was  to  flatter  their  kings  with  hope  of  success  in  their  wars 
and  undertaking,  had  foretold  the  taking  of  Jerusalem,  con- 
sidering that  the  king  of  the  Chaldees,^  had  used  all  manner 
of  divinations,  before  he  undertook  the  war  against  it.  It 
is  too  much  trouble  to  abide  on  such  vain  imaginations. 
Nor  doth  Grotius  take  any  care  to  evidence,  how  that  which 
he  delivers  as  the  sense  of  the  words,  may  so  much  as  be  ty- 

sEzck.  xxi.  21.  22, 


84  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

pically  spoken  of  Jesus  Christ,  or  be  any  way  accommodated 
to  hira. 

The  prophet  proceeds,  chap.  liii.  with  the  same  continued 
discourse.  '  Who  hath  believed  our  report ;  and  to  whom  is 
the  arm  of  the  Lord  revealed  V  which  words  are  thus  illus- 
trated by  the  annotator. 

'  Vultis  scire,  inquit,  quis  ille  sit  futurus  de  quo  csepi  agere, 
qui  et  meis  prophetiis  plenam  habebit  fidem,  et  ipst;  de  max- 
imis  rebus,  quas  potentia  Dei  peraget,  revelationes  accipiet 
exactissimas,  omnibus  circumstantiis  additis  :  Dabo  vobis 
geminas  ejus  notas,  unde  cognosci  possit :  Has  notae  in  Je- 
remiam  quidem  congruunt  prius,  sed  potius  in  Christum.' 
'Will  you  know,  saith  he,  who  he  shall  be,  of  whom  I  have 
begun  to  treat  ?  Who  shall  both  fully  believe  my  prophecies, 
and  shall  himself  receive  most  exact  revelations  of  the  great 
things  that  the  power  of  God  shall  bring  to  pass,  all  the  cir- 
cumstances being  added  ;  I  will  give  you  two  notes  of  him, 
by  which  he  may  be  known.  These  notes  in  the  first  place 
agree  to  Jeremiah  ;  but  rather  to  Christ.' 

1. 1  suppose  if  we  had  not  the  advantage  of  receiving  quite 
another  interpretation  of  these  words,  from  the  Holy  Ghost 
himself  in  the  New  Testament,  yet  it  would  not  have  been 
easy  for  any  to  have  swallowed  this  gloss,  that  is  as  little 
allied  to  the  text,  as  any  thing  that  can  possibly  be  imagined. 
The  Holy  Ghost  tells  us,  that  these  words  are  the  complaint 
of  the  prophet,  and  the  church  of  believers  unto  God,  con- 
cerning the  paucity  of  them  that  would  believe  in  Christ,  or 
did  so  believe,  when  he  was  exhibited  in  the  flesh  :  the  power 
of  the  Lord  with  him  for  our  salvation,  being  effectually  re- 
vealed to  very  few  of  the  Jews  :  so  John  xii.  37,  38.  '  But 
though  he  had  done  so  many  miracles  before  them,  yet  they 
believed  not  on  him,  that  the  saying  of  Isaias  the  prophet 
might  be  fulfilled.  Lord  who  hath  believed  our  report,  and 
tovvhom  hath  the  arm  of  the  Lord  been  revealed?  So  Rom. 
X,  16.  'But  they  have  not  obeyed  the  gospel;  for  Isaias  saith. 
Lord,  who  hath  believed  our  report?' 

2.  Let  us  now  a  little  compare  these  several  interpreta- 
tions : '  Who  hath  believed  our  report  V  Lord  how  few  do  be- 
lieve on  Christ,  working  miracles  himself,  and  preached  by 
the  apostles  ?  Jeremiah  shall  believe  my  prophecies,  saith 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  85 

Grotius.  To  whom  is  the  arm  of  the  Lord  revealed?  To  how 
few  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  made  known  by  the 
Holy  Ghost?  Jeremiah  also  shall  have  clear  revelations,  says 
Grotius.  And  this  is  counted  learnedly  to  interpret  the 
Scriptures  ;  and  every  day  are  such  annotations  on  the  Scrip- 
ture multiplied. 

3.  It  is  not  then  the  prophet's  prediction  of  what  he 
should  do,  of  whom  he  treats,  what  he  should  believe,  what 
he  should  receive,  whereof  there  is  notice  given  in  this  verse ; 
but  what  others  shall  do  in  reference  to  the  preaching  of  him; 
they  shall  not  believe,  '  Who  hath  believed  V 

4.  The  annotator  tells  us,  these  words  do  agree  to  Christ 
chiefly,  and  magis,  Kara  Xi^iv.  This  then  must  be  the  signi- 
fication of  them,  according  to  his  interpretation,  in  relation 
unto  Christ:  'He  shall  believe  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  and 
receive  revelations  of  his  own.'  For  my  part  1  am  rather  of 
the  mind  of  John  and  Paul,  concerning  these  words,  than  of 
the  learned  annotator's. 

5.  There  is  no  mention  of  describing  the  person  spoken 
of  by  two  notes  :  but  in  the  first  words  the  prophet  enters 
upon  the  description  of  Christ,  what  he  was,  what  he  did, 
and  suffered  for  us,  which  lis  pursues  to  the  end  of  the 
chapter. 

Ver.  2.  *  For  he  shall  grow  up  before  him  as  a  tender  plant, 
and  as  a  root  out  of  a  dry  ground ;  he  hath  no  form  nor 
comeliness,  and  when  we  shall  see  him,  there  is  no  beauty, 
that  we  should  desire  him.'  An  entrance  is  made  in  these 
words,  into  the  account  that  the  prophet  intends  to  give, 
why  so  few  believed  in  Christ  the  Messiah,  when  he  came, 
after  they  had  looked  for  him,  and  desired  him  so  long, 
namely  his  great  unsuitableness  to  their  expectation;  they 
looked  for  a  person  shining  in  honour  and  glory,  raising  a 
visible  pompous  terrene  kingdom,  whereof  they  should  be 
made  partakers.  But  Christ,  when  he  comes  indeed,  grows 
up  both  in  his  human  nature,  and  his  kingdom,  as  a  tender 
plant,  obnoxious  to  the  incursions  of  beasts,  winds,  and 
storms,  and  treading  on  of  every  one  ;  yet  preserved  by  the 
providence  of  God,  under  whose  eye,  and  before  whom  he 
grew  up,  he  shall  prosper;  and  he  shall  be  as  a  root  pre- 
served in  the  dry  ground  of  the  parched  house  of  David,  and 
poor  family  of  Mary  and  Joseph,  every  way  outwardly  cou- 


86  OF    TlIK    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

temptible  ;  so  that  from  thence  none  could  look  for  the 
springing  of  such  a  branch  of  the  Lord.  And  whereas  they 
expected  that  he  should  appear  with  a  great  deal  of  outward 
form,  loveliness,  beauty,  and  every  thing  that  should  make 
a  glorious  person  desirable,  when  they  come  to  see  him,  in- 
deed, in  his  outward  condition,  they  shall  not  be  able  to  dis- 
cover any  thing  in  the  world,  for  which  they  should  desire 
him,  own  him,  or  receive  him.  And  therefore  after  they  shall 
have  gone  forth  upon  the  report  that  shall  go  of  him,  to  see 
him,  they  shall  be  offended  and  return,  and  say,  *  Is  not  this 
the  carpenter's  son,  and  are  not  his  brethren  with  us  V  This 
sword  of  the  Lord,  which  lies  at  the  heart  of  the  Jews  to 
this  day,  the  learned  annotator  labours  to  ease  them  of,  by 
accommodating  these  words  to  Jeremiah  ;  which  through 
the  favour  of  the  reader,  I  shall  no  otherwise  refute,  than  by 
its  repetition  :  'for  he  shall  grow  up  before  the  Lord  as  a  ten- 
der plant ;  Jeremiah  shall  serve  God  in  his  prophetical  office, 
whilst  he  is  young.  And  as  a  root  out  of  a  dry  ground  : 
He  shall  be  born  at  Anathoth,  a  poor  village.  He  hath  no 
form  nor  comeliness:  he  shall  be  heavy  and  sad.  And  when 
we  see  him,  &,c.  He  shall  not  have  an  amiable  countenance.' 
Who  might  not  these  things  be  spoken  of  him  that  was  a 
prophet,  if  the  name  of  Anathoth  be  left  out,  and  some  other 
supplied  in  the  room  thereof? 

The  third  verse  pursues  the  description  of  the  Messiah 
in  respect  of  his  abject  outward  condition,  which  being  of 
the  same  import  with  the  former,  and  it  being  not  my  aim 
to  comment  on  the  text,  1  shall  pass  by. 

Ver.  4.  '  Surely  he  hath  borne  our  griefs  and  carried  our 
sorrows  :  yet  we  did  esteem  him  stricken,  smitten  of  God, 
and  aflflicted.'  Having  formerly  given  the  sense  of  these 
words,  and  vindicated  them  from  the  exceptions  of  the  So- 
cinians,  I  shall  do  no  more  but  animadvert  upon  their  ac- 
commodation to  Jeremiah  by  Grotius.     Thus  then  he, 

'  Vere  languores  nostros  ipse  tulit.]  Ille  non  talia 
meritus,  mala  subiit  quae  nos  eramus  meriti.  Haec  omnia 
ait  Judseos  dicturos  postcaptam  urbem.'  'He  that  deserved 
no  buch  thing  underwent  the  evils  that  we  had  deserved. 
All  these  things  he  saith  the  Jews  shall  say  after  the  taking 
of  the  city.' 

It  is  of  the  unworthy  dealing  of  the  Jews  with  the  pro- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  87 

phet  in  Jerusalem  during  the  siege,  that  he  supposes  these 
words  are  spoken,  and  spoken  by  the  Jews  after  the  taking 
of  the  city.  The  sum  is,  when  he  was  so  hardly  treated,  we 
deserved  it,  even  to  be  so  dealt  withal,  not  he,  who  delivered 
the  word  of  God. 

But  1.  The  words  are,  *  he  bare  our  griefs,  and  carried 
our  sorrows.'  That  by  our  griefs  and  sorrows,  our  sins  and 
the  punishment  due  to  them  are  intended,  hath  been  de- 
clared. That  the  force  of  the  words  '  bearing  and  carrying' 
do  evince,  that  he  took  them  upon  himself,  hath  also  been 
manifested.  That  he  so  took  them,  as  that  God  made  them 
meet  upon  him  in  his  justice,  hath  likewise  been  proved. 
That  by  his  bearing  of  them  we  come  to  have  peace,  and  are 
freed,  shall  be  farther  cleared  ;  as  it  is  expressly  mentioned, 
ver.  5.  11.  Let  us  now  see  how  this  may  be  accommodated 
to  Jeremiah.  Did  he^nidergo  the  punishment  due  to  the 
sins  of  the  Jews  ?  Or  did  they  bear  their  own  sins  ?  Did  God 
cause  their  sins  to  meet  on  him,  then  when  he  bare  them,  or 
is  it  not  expressly  against  his  law,  that  one  should  bear  the 
sins  of  another?  Were  the  Jews  freed?  Had  they  peace  by 
Jeremiah's  suiferings  ?  Or  rather  did  they  not  hasten  their 
utter  ruin?  If  this  be  to  interpret  the  Scripture,  I  know  not 
what  it  is  to  corrupt  it. 

2.  There  is  not  the  least  evidence,  that  the  Jews  had 
any  such  thoughts,  or  were  at  all  greatly  troubled  after  the 
taking  of  the  city  by  the  Chaldeans,  concerning  their  deal- 
ings with  Jeremiah  ;  whom  they  afterward  accused  to  his 
face,  of  being  a  false  prophet,  and  lying  to  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord.  Neither  are  these  words  supposed  to  be 
spoken  by  the  Jews,  but  by  the  church  of  God. 

*  Et  nos  existimavimus  eum  percussum  (leprosum  ver.  6.) 
vulneratum  et  a  Deo  humiliatum.]  ^Nos  credimus  Jeremiani 
merito  conjectum  in  carcerem  et  lacum,  Deo  ilium  exosum 
habente,  ut  hostem  urbis,  templi,  et  pseudo  prophetam.' 
*  We  believed  that  Jeremiah  was  deservedly  cast  into  the 
prison  and  mire,  God  hating  him  as  an  enemy  of  the  city  and 
temple,  and  as  a  false  prophet.'    But, 

1.  These  words  may  be  thus  applied  to  any  prophet 
whatever,  that  suffered  persecution  and  martyrdom  from  the 
Jews,  as  who  of  them  did  not,  the  one  or  the   other?    For 

e  Grot. 


88  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

they  quickly  saw  their  error  and  mistake  as  to  one,  though 
at  the  same  time  they  fall  upon  another  ;  as  our  Saviour  up- 
braideth  the  Pharisees. 

Nor 

2.  V/as  this  any  such  great  matter,  that  the  Jews  should 
think  a  true  prophet  to  be  a  false  prophet,  and  therefore  de- 
servedly punished,  as  in  the  law  was  appointed,  that  it  should 
thus  signally  be  foretold  concerning  Jeremiah.  But  that 
the  Son  of  God,  the  Son  and  heir  of  the  vineyard,  should 
be  so  dealt  withal,  this  is  that  the  prophet  might  well  bring 
in  the  church  thus  signally  complaining  of.  Of  him  to  this 
day  are  the  thoughts  of  the  Jews  no  other  than  as  here  re- 
corded, which  they  express  by  calling  him  *)br\. 

The  reason  of  the  low  condition  of  the  Messiah,  which 
was  so  misapprehended  of  the  Jews,  is  rendered  in  the  next 
verse,  and  their  mistake  rectified. 

'  But  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  he  was 
bruised  for  our  iniquities,  the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was 
upon  him, and  with  his  stripes  we  are  healed.' 

I  suppose  it  will  not  be  questioned,  but  that  these  words 
belong  to  our  blessed  Saviour,  and  that  redemption  which  he 
wrought  for  us  by  his  death  and  blood.  Not  only  the  full  ac- 
complishment of  the  thing  itself  as  delivered  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, but  the  quotation  of  the  words  themselves,  to  that 
end  and  purpose  ;  1  Pet.  ii.  24.  do  undeniably  evince  it.  In 
what  sense  the  words  are  to  be  understood  of  him,  we  have 
formerly  declared.  That  in  that  sense  they  are  applicable 
to  any  other  will  not  be  pleaded.  That  they  have  any  other 
sense  is  yet  to  be  proved.     To  this,  thus  the  annotator, 

*  Ipse  autem  vulneratus  est  propter  iniquitates  nostras] 
in  Hebrffio,'^  At  vero  ipse  vulneratus  est  (id  est,  male  trac- 
tatus  est)  crimine  nostro  :  in  nobis  culpa  fuit,  non  in  ipso  : 
Sic  et  quod  sequitur,  Attritus  est  per  culpam  nostrorum :  Ini- 
quissima  de  eo  sensimus  et  propterea  crudelitur  eum  tracta- 
vimus  :  id  nunc  rebus  ipsis  apparet.  Similia  dixerant  Judsei 
qui  se  converterunt  die  Pentecostes  :  et  deinceps.' 

*  But  he  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions]  In  the 
Hebrew,  But  he  was  wounded  (that  is,  evilly  entreated)  by 
our  fault.  The  fault  was  in  us,  not  in  him.  And  so  that 
which  foUov/s;   '  He  wasbruised  by  our  fault  :'  we  thought 

b  Giot. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  89 

ill  of  him,  and  therefore  handled  him  cruelly.  This  now  is 
evident  from  the  things  themselves.  The  like  things  said  the 
Jews,  who  converted  themselves  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and 
afterward.' 

The  reading  of  the  words  must  first  be  considered,  and 
then  their  sense  and  meaning.  For  against  both  these  doth 
the  learned  annotator  transgress,  perverting  the  former,  that 
he  might  the  more  easily  wrest  the  latter.  *  He  was  wounded 
for  our  sins'  '  crimine  nostro'  by  our  crime  ;  that  is,  it  was 
our  fault  not  his,  that  he  was  so  evilly  dealt  with.  And  not 
to  insist  on  the  word,  '  wounded'  or  '  tormented  with  pain,' 
which  is  slightly  interpreted  by  evil-entreated,  the  question 
IS,  whether  the  efficient,  or  procuring  and  meritorious  cause 
of  Christ's  wounding  be  here  expressed. 

2.  The  words  used  to  express  this  cause  of  wounding  are 
two,  and  both  emphatical :  the  first  is  yti^D,  he  was  wounded 
li'j/ti'DO  for  our  prevarications,  our  proud  transgressing  of 
the  law,  yii>D,  '  est  rebellare,  et  exire  a  voluntate  Domini, 
vel  preecepto,  ex  superbia  :'  R.  D.  in  Michi.  It  is  properly 
to  rebel  against  man  or  God.  Against  man  ;  2  Kings  iii.  7. 
'  The  king  of  Moab  yii'D  hath  rebelled  against  me :'  and 
chap.  viii.  20.  '  In  his  days  Edom  ytt'D  rebelled :'  as  also 
against  God  ;  Isa.  i.  2.  *  I  have  brought  up  children,  and 
they  ll/li'D  have  rebelled  against  me.'  Nor  is  it  used  in  any 
other  sense  in  the  Scripture,  but  for  prevarication  and  rebel- 
lion with  an  high  hand,  and  through  pride.  The  other  word 
is  my.  He  was  bruised  i3>niiiyD '  for  our  iniquities ;'  the  word 
signifies,  a  declining  from  the  right  way,  with  perversity  and 
frowardness.  my,  *  est  inique  vel  perverse  agere ;  proprie 
curvum  esse,  vel  incurvari ;'  so  that  all  sorts  of  sins,  are  here 
emphatically  and  distinctly  expressed,  even  the  greatest  re- 
bellion, and  most  perverse,  crooked  turning  aside  from  the 
ways  of  God. 

3.  Their  causality,  in  reference  to  the  wounding  of  him 
here  mentioned,  is  expressed  in  the  preposition  p  which 
properly  is  '  de,  ex,  a,  e,'  '  from,'  or  '  for.'  Now  to  put  an 
issue  to  the  sense  of  these  words,  and  thence,  in  a  good 
measure,  to  the  sense  of  this  place,  let  the  reader  consult  the 
collections  of  the  use  of  this  preposition  in  Pagnine,  Buxtorf, 
Calasius,  or  any  other ;  when  he  finds  it  with  sin  as  here, 
and  relating  to  punishment,  if  he  find  it  once  to  signify  any 

VOL.    IX.  H 


9Q  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

thing  but  the  meritorious  procuring  cause  of  punishment, 
the  learned  annotator  may  yet  enjoy  his  interpretation  in 
quietness.  But  if  this  be  so  ?  If  this  expression  do  con- 
stantly and  perpetually  denote  the  impulsive  procuring  cause 
of  punishment ;  it  was  not  well  done  of  him,  to  leave  the 
preposition  quite  out  in  the  first  place,  and  in  the  next  place 
so  to  express  it,  as  to  confine  it  to  signify  the  efficient  cause 
of  what  is  affirmed. 

This  being  then  the  reading  of  the  words,  '  He  was 
wounded  or  tormented  for  our  sins.'  The  sense  as  re- 
lating to  Jesus  Christ,  is  manifest.  When  we  thought  he 
was  justly  for  his  own  sake,  as  a  seducer  and  malefactor, 
smitten  of  God,  he  was  then  under  the  punishment  due  to 
our  iniquities  ;  was  so  tormented  for  what  we  had  deserved. 
This  is  thus  rendered  by  our  annotator;  'Jeremiah  was  not 
in  the  fault,  who  prophesied  to  us,  but  we,  that  he  was  so 
evilly  dealt  with.  He  was  bruised  for  our  iniquities,  that  is, 
we  thought  hard  of  him,  and  dealt  evilly  with  him  ;'  which 
may  pass  with  the  former. 

The  LXX  render  these  words  :  avrog  Se  hpavnaria^t}  dia 
TUQ  afxapTiag  rifiCjv,  kol  /nfioXaKiarat  dia  rag  avon'iag  rifxu)v' 
Rightly !  to  be  wounded  ha  rag  ajiagrlag,  is  to  be  wounded 
for,  and  not  by  sin,  no  otherwise  than  that  also  signifies  the 
impulsive  cause.  And  the  Chaldee  paraphrast,  not  able  to 
avoid  the  clearness  of  the  expression,  denoting  the  merito- 
rious cause  of  punishment,  and  yet  not  understanding  how  the 
Messiah  should  be  wounded,  or  punished,  he  thus  rendered 
the  words :  '  Et  ipse  sedificabit  domum  sanctuarii  nostri, 
quod  violatum  est  propter  peccata  nostra,  et  traditum  est 
propter  iniquitates  nostras.'  '  He  shall  build  the  house  of  our 
sanctuary,  which  was  violated  for  our  sins  (that  is,  as  a  pu- 
nishment of  them)  and  delivered  for  our  iniquities.'  So  he  : 
not  being  able  to  offer  sufficient  violence  to  the  phrase  of 
expression,  nor  understanding  an  accommodation  of  the 
words  to  him  spoken  of,  he  leaves  the  words,  with  their  own 
proper  significancy,  but  turns  their  intendment,  by  an  addi- 
tion to  them  of  his  own. 

Proceed  we  to  the  next  words,  which  are  exegetical  of 
these :  *  He  was  wounded  for  our  sins ;  the  chastisement  of 
our  peace  was  upon  him,  and  with  his  stripes  are  we  healed.' 
Of  these  thus  the  annotator. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  91 

'  Disciplina  pacis  nostras  super  eum]  apud  eum,  id  est, 
monitis,  nobis  attulit  salutaria,  si  ea  reciperemus.'  *  He 
gave  us  wholesome  warnings,  if  we  would  have  received 
them.' 

But  1.  There  is  in  this  sense  of  the  words,  nothing  pecu- 
liar to  Jeremiah.  All  the  rest  of  the  prophets  did  so,  and 
were  rejected  no  less  than  he. 

2.  The  words  are  not,  '  He  gave  us  good  counsel, 
if  we  would  have  taken  it.'  But,  *  The  chastisement  of  our 
peace  was  upon  him.'  And  what  affinity  there  is  between 
these  two  expressions,  that  the  one  of  them  should  be  used 
for  the  explication  of  the  other,  I  profess  I  know  not;  Peter 
expounds  it  by,  '  He  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the 
tree  ;'  1  Pet.  ii.  24. 

3.  The  word  rendered  by  us, '  chastisement ;'  by  the  Vulgar 
Latin  which  Grotius  follows,  *  disciplina,'  is  "IDIO,  which 
as  it  hath  its  first  signification  to  '  learn,'  so  it  signifies 
also  to*  correct,'because  learning  is  seldom  carried  on  with- 
out correction ;  and  thence  '  disciplina'  signifies  the  same. 
Now  what  is  the  *  correction  of  our  peace  V  Was  it  the  in- 
struction of  Christ,  not  that  he  gave,  but  that  he  had,  that 
we  have  our  peace  by  ?  The  word  vb)}  he  renders,  *  apud 
eum,'  contrary  to  the  known  sense  of  the  word  ;  n^j;  is  *  to  as- 
cend, to  lift  up,  to  make  to  ascend  ;'  a  word  of  most  frequent 
use  ;  thence  is  the  word  used,  rendered  *  super  ;'  intimating 
that  the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  made  to  ascend  on 
him  :  as  Peter  expresseth  the  sense  of  this  place ;  6c  tuq 
afiapTiag  rifxiov  avrdg  avijvajKSv  ev  no  awinaTi  avrou  IttXto  ^wAov" 
*  he  carried  up  our  sins  on  bis  body  on  the  tree;'  they  were  made 
to  ascend  on  him.  The  LXX  render  the  words  ett'  avrbv ; 
the  Vulgar  Latin  '  super  eum.'  And  there  is  not  the  least 
colour  for  the  annotator's,  'apud  eum.'  Now  'the  chastise- 
ment of  our  peace,'  that  is,  the  punishment  that  was  due,  that 
we  might  have  peace,  or,  whereby  we  have  peace  with  God, 
'was  upon  him;'  is,  it  seems, '  He  gave  us  good  counsel  and 
admonition,  if  we  wQuld  have  followed  it.' 

4.  Here  is  no  word  expressing  any  act  of  the  person 
spoken  of,  but  his  suffering  or  undergoing  punishment.  But 
of  this  enough. 

'  Etlivore  ejus  sanati  sumus.]  Livore  ejus,  id  est,  ipsius 
patientia,  nos  sanati  fuissemus,  id  est,  liberati  ab  impenden- 

H  2 


92  OF     THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHllIST. 

tibus  malis,  si  verbis  ipsius,  tanta  malorum  tolerantia  confir- 
matis,  habuissemus  fidem.  Hebreei  potentialem  modum  aliter 
quam  per  indicativum  exprimere  nequeunt ;  ideo  multa  ad- 
hibenda  attentio  ad  consequendos  sensus.'  *  With  his  stripes 
we  are  healed ;  with  his  wound,  or  sore,  or  stripe,  that  is,  by 
his  patience  we  might  have  been  healed  ;  that  is,  freed  from 
impendent  evils,  had  we  believed  his  words,  confirmed  with 
so  great  bearing  of  evils.  The  Hebrews  cannot  express  the 
potential  mood,  but  by  the  indicative  :  therefore  much  at- 
tention is  to  be  used  to  find  out  the  sense.' 

I  cannot  but  profess,  that  setting  aside  some  of  the  mon- 
strous figments  of  the  Jewish  Rabbins,  1  never  in  my  whole 
life  met  with  an  interpretation  of  Scripture,  offering  more 
palpable  violence  to  the  words,  than  this  of  the  annotator. 
Doubtless  to  repeat  it,  with  all  sober  men,  is  sufficient  to 
confute  it.     I  shall  briefly  add  ; 

1.  The  prophet  says,  *  we  are  healed  :*  the  annotator, '  we 
might  have  been  healed,  but  are  not.' 

2.  The  healing  in  the  prophet,  is  by  deliverance  from 
sin,  mentioned  in  the  words  foregoing :  and  so  interpreted  by 
Peter,  1  Ep.  ii.  24.  whereby  we  have  peace  with  God,  which 
we  have.  The  healing  in  the  annotator,  is  the  deliverance 
from  the  destruction  by  the  Chaldeans  which  they  were  not 
delivered  from,  but  might  have  been. 

3.  mnn  in  the  prophet,  is  juwXtu;//  in  Peter;  but  'patience' 
in  the  annotator. 

4.  *  By  his  stripes  we  are  healed,.'  is  in  the  annotator, '  By 
hearkening  to  him  we  might  have  been  healed  ;'  or  delivered 
from  the  evils  threatened, '  by  his  stripes ;'  that  is, '  by  heark- 
ening to  his  counsel,  when  he  endured  evils  patiently ;' 
'  we  are  healed,'  that  is,  we  might  have  been  delivered,  but 
are  not. 

5.  As  to  the  reason  given  of  this  interpretation,  that  the 
Hebrews  have  no  potential  mood,  I  shall  desire  to  know  who 
compelled  the  learned  annotator  to  suppose  himself  wiser 
than  the  Holy  Ghost,  1  Pet.  ii.  24.  to  wrest  these  words  into 
a  potential  signification,  which  he  expresseth  directly,  actu- 
ally, indicatively.  For  a  Jew  to  have  done  this  out  of 
hatred  and  enmity  to  the  cross  of  Christ,  had  been  tolerable  : 
but  for  a  man  professing  himself  a  Christian,  it  is  somewhat 
a  strange  attempt. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  93 

6.  To  close  with  this  verse;  we  do  not  esteem  ourselves 
at  all  beholding  to  the  anuotator,  for  allowing  an  accommo- 
dation of  these  words  to  our  blessed  Saviour;  affirming,  that 
the  Jews,  who  converted  themselves  (for  so  it  must  be  ex- 
pressed, least  any  should  mistake,  and  think  their  conver- 
sion to  have  been  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  and  grace  of  God) 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  used  such  words  as  those  that  the 
Jews  are  feigned  to  use  in  reference  to  Jeremiah.  It  is  quite 
of  another  business  that  the  prophet  is  speaking  :  not  of  the 
sin  of  the  Jews  in  crucifying  Christ,  but  of  all  our  sins,  for 
which  he  was  crucified. 

• Munera  quidem  mi  sit,  sed  raisit  in  haino. 

Ver.  6.  'All  we  like  sheep  are  gone  astray,  we  are  turned 
every  one  to  his  own  way,  and  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  him 
the  iniquity  of  us  all. 

Grotius.  *  Erraveramus  a  Manassis  temporibus,  alii  ad 
alia  idola  :  et  permisit  Deus  ut  ille  nostro  gravi  crimine  in- 
digna  pateretur.'  '  We  have  all  erred  from  the  days  of  Ma- 
nasseh,  some  following  some  ido4s,  others  others :  And  God 
permitted  that  he  by  our  grievous  crime  should  suffer  most 
unworthy  things.' 

Though  the  words  of  this  verse  are  most  important,  ye 
having  at  large  before  insisted  on  the  latter  words  of  it,  I 
shall  be  brief  in  my  animadversions  on  the  signal  deprava- 
tion of  them  by  the  learned  annotator.     Therefore, 

1.  Why  is  this  confession  of  sins  restrained  to  the  times 
of  Manasseh  ?  and  not  afterward  ?  The  expression  is  uni- 
versal. 13^3  '  all  of  us  :'  and  a  man  to  his  own  way.  And  if 
these  words  may  be  allowed  to  respect  Jesus  Christ  at  all, 
they  will  not  bear  any  such  restriction.  But  this  is  the 
TrpwTov  xptv^og  of  this  interpretation  ;  that  these  are  the 
words  of  the  Jews  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  which 
are  the  words  of  the  converted  Jews  and  Gentiles,  after  the 
suffering  of  Jesus  Christ. 

2.  Why  is  the  sin  confessed,  restrained  to  idolatry? 
Men's  own  ways  which  they  walk  in,  when  they  turn  from 
the  ways  of  God,  and  know  not  the  ways  of  peace,  compre- 
hend all  their  evils  of  every  kind  that  their  hearts  and  lives 
are  infected  withal. 

3.  The  last  words  are  unworthy  a  person  of  much  less 
learning,  and  judgment  than  the  annotator.     For, 


94  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

1.  The  word  yuDn  (of  which  before)  is  interpreted  with- 
out pretence,  warrant,  or  colour, '  Permisit/  God  permitted. 
But  of  that  word  sufficiently  before. 

2.  By  '  his  suflering  unworthy  things  through  our  fault' 
he  understands,  not  the  meritorious  cause  of  h-is  suffering, 
but  the  means  whereby  he  suffered  :  even  the  unbelief  and 
cruelty  of  the  Jews,  which  is  most  remote  from  the  sense  of 
the  place. 

3.  He  mentions  here  distinctly,  the  fault  of  them  that 
speak,  and  his  suffering  that  is  spoken  of.  '  Permisit  Deus 
ut  ille  nostro  gravi  crimine  indigna  pateretur  :'  when  in  the 
text  the  fault  of  them  that  speak,  is  the  suffering  of  him 
that  is  spoken  of.  '  Our  iniquities  were  laid  on  him ;'  that 
is,  the  punishment  due  to  them. 

4.  His  suffering  in  the  text  is  God's  act :  in  the  anno- 
tations, the  Jews  only. 

5.  There  is  neither  sense  nor  coherence  in  this  interpre- 
tation of  the  words.  *  We  have  all  sinned,  and  followed  idols  : 
and  God  hath  suffered  him  to  be  evilly  entreated  by  us  :' 
when  the  whole  context  evidently  gives  an  account  of  our 
deserving,  and  the  ways  whereby  we  are  delivered  :  and 
therein  a  reason  of  the  low  and  abject  condition  of  the  Mes- 
siah in  this  world.     But  of  this  at  large  elsewhere. 

Ver.  7.  *  He  was  oppressed,  and  he  was  afflicted,  yet  he 
opened  not  his  mouth :  he  is  brought  as  a  lamb  to  the 
slaughter,  and  as  a  sheep  before  her  shearers  is  dumb,  so  he 
opened  not  his  mouth.' 

'  Oblatus  est,  quia  ipse  voluit,  et  non  aperuit  os  suum.]  in 
Heb.  oppressus  et  afflictus  fuit,  et  non  aperuit  os  suum. 
Sensum  bene  expresserunt  LXX  koI  avrbg  dia  to  KEKUKioar^ai 
ouK  dvoiys  rb  arofia  avrov.  Etiam  tunc  cum  in  carcerem 
ageretur,  et  in  locum  lutosum  nihil  fecit,  dixitve  iracunde. 

'  Sicut  ovis]  mitissimum  animal. 

'  Et  quasi  agnus]  cum  quo  ispe  Jeremias  se  coraparat, 
cap  11.  v.  18. 

*  He  was  offered  because  he  would,  and  he  opened  not 
his  mouth  ;  in  the  Hebrew,  he  was  oppressed  and  afflicted. 
The  LXX  have  well  expressed  the  sense.  Because  of 
affliction  he  opened  not  his  mouth  :  even  then  when  he  was 
thrown  into  the  prison  and  mire,  he  neither  did,  nor  spake 
any  thing  angrily.' 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  95 

'  As  a  sheep*  a  most  mild  creature. 

'  And  as  a  lamb/  wherewith  Jeremiah  compares  himself, 
chap.  xi.  ver.  18.' 

The  process  of  the  words  is  to  give  an  account  of  the 
same  matter  formerly  insisted  on,  concerning  one's  suffering 
for  the  sin  of  others.  That  the  words  are  spoken  of  the  Lord 
Jesus,  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  long  since  put  it  out  of  question  ; 
Acts  viii,  32.  And  though  there  be  some  difficulty  and  va- 
riety in  the  interpretation  of  the  first  words,  yet  his  patient 
suffering  as  the  lamb  of  God,  typed  out  by  all  the  sacrifices 
of  the  Jews,  under  the  punishment  due  to  our  sins,  shines 
through  the  whole. 

1.  For  the  words  themselves,  they  are  Nini  li'JJ  which  are 
variously  rendered  :  koi  avrog  dtuTo  KeKUKwa^ai,  LXX.  And 
he  for,  or  because  of  affliction.  *  Oblatus  est  quia  ipse  vo- 
luit.  Vulg.  Lat.  He  was  offered  because  he  would.  '  Op- 
pressus  est  et  ipse  afflictus  est.  Arias  Mont.  Exigitur  et  ipse 
affligitur,' Jun.  '  it  was  exacted,  and  he  was  afflicted.'  Others, 
*  it  was  exacted,  and  he  answered,'  which  seems  most  to  agree 
with  the  letter  ;  W^i  is  sometimes  written  with  the  point  on 
the  right  corner  of  W  and  then  it  signifies  to  approach,  to 
draw  nigh ;  and  in  the  matter  of  sacrifice  it  signifies  to 
offer,  because  men  drew  nigh  to  the  Lord  in  offering.  So 
Amos  V.  25.  >b  Onti'Jn.  Have  you  made  to  .draw  nigh  your 
offerings  and  sacrifices  ?  Or  have  you  offered  ?  Thus  the 
Vulg:.  Lat.  read  the  word,  and  rendered  it  '  Oblatus  est,'  he 
was  offered.  With  the  point  in  the  left  corner,  it  is  to  exact, 
to  require,  to  afflict,  to  oppress.  To  exact  and  require  at 
the  hands  of  any,  is  the  most  common  sense  of  the  word. 
So  2  Kings  xxiii.  35,  Jehoiachim  exacted  silver  and  gold 
of  the  people  of  the  land.  Thence  is  ti^Jl3  an  exactor,  one 
that  requires  what  is  imposed  on  men  :  Zee.  ix.  8.  x.  4.  Being- 
used  here  in  a  passive  sense,  it  is,  it  was  exacted,  and  re- 
quired of  him  ;  that  is,  the  punishment  due  to  our  sins  was 
required  of  Jesus  Christ,  having  undertaken  to  be  a  sponsor  : 
and  so  Junius  hath  supplied  the  words :  '  Exigitur  pana,' 
'  punishment  was  exacted.'  And  this  is  more  proper,  than 
what  we  read ;  '  He  was  oppressed ;'  though  that  also  be 
significant  of  the  same  thing.  How  the  punishment  of  our 
sin  was  exacted  or  required  of  Jeremiah,  the  annotator  de- 
clares not. 


96  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

The  other  word  is  nw  the  Vulgate  Latin  seems  to 
look  to  the  active  use  of  the  word, '  to  answer  ;'  and  therefore 
renders  it  'voluit;'  he  would,  he  willingly  submitted  to  it, 
or  he  undertook  to  do  that  which  was  exacted.  And  much 
may  be  said  for  this  interpretation  from  the  use  of  the  word 
in  Scripture.  And  then  the  sense  will  be,  it  was  exacted  of 
him,  or  our  punishment  was  required  of  him,  and  he  imder- 
took  it  with  willingness,  and  patience  :  so  it  denotes  the  will 
of  Christ  in  undergoing  the  penalty  due  to  our  sins,  which 
he  expresseth ;  Psal.  xl.  8.  Heb.  x.  6,  7.  Take  it  in  the 
sense  wherein  it  is  most  commonly  used,  and  it  denotes  the 
event  of  the  exacting  the  penalty  of  our  sins  of  him :  '  He 
was  afflicted.'  In  what  sense  this  may  possibly  be  applied 
to  Jeremiah,  I  leave  to  the  annotator's  friend  to  find  out. 

The  next  words,  '  He  opened  not  his  mouth,'  he  applies 
unto  the  patience  of  Jeremiah,  who  did  neither  speak,  nor  do 
any  thing  angrily  when  he  was  cast  into  prison.  Of  that 
honour  which  we  owe  to  all  the  saints  departed,  and  in  an 
especial  manner  to  the  great  builders  of  the  church  of  God, 
the  prophets  and  apostles,  this  is  no  small  part,  that  we 
deliver  them  from  under  the  burden  of  having  that  ascribed 
to  them,  who  are  members,  which  is  peculiar  to  their  head. 
I  say  then,  the  perfect  submission  and  patience  expressed 
in  these  words,  was  not  found  in  holy  Jeremiah,  who  in  his 
affliction  and  trial  opened  his  mouth,  and  cursed  the  day 
wherein  he  was  born  :  and  when  he  says  that  himself  was 
as  a  lamb,  and  as  an  ox  appointed  to  the  slaughter,  in  the 
same  place,  and  at  the  same  time  he  prays  for  vengeance  on 
his  adversaries,  Jerem.  xi.  19;  in  those  words,  not  denoting 
his  patience,  but  his  being  exposed  to  their  cruelty. 

Ver.  8.  '  He  was  taken  from  prison  and  from  judgment, 
and  who  shall  declare  his  generation?  For  he  was  cut  off 
out  of  the  land  of  the  living ;  for  the  transgression  of  my 
people  was  he  smitten.' 

The  person  speaking  is  here  changed,  as  is  manifest  from 
the  close  of  the  verse,  '  for  the  transgression  of  my  people ;' 
who  were  the  speakers  before.  These,  then,  are  the  words 
of  God  by  the  prophet :  and  they  are  not  without  their  diffi- 
culties, concerning  which  the  reader  may  consult  commen- 
tators at  large.     Grotius  thus, 

'  De  carcere  et  judicio  ablatus  est]  id  est,  liberatus  tan- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  97 

dem:  Judicium  vocat  hoc,  quia  specie  judicii  ipsi  hsec  mala 
imposita  fuerunt,  Jerem.  32.  3.  liberatur  autem  per  Baby- 
lonios.  Generationem  ejus  quis  enarrabit?]  Quis  numerare 
poterit  dies  vitse  ejus?  id  est,  erit  valde  longsevus.  Quia 
abscissus  est  de  terra  viventium  nempe]  cum  actus  fuit  pri- 
mum  in  carcerem,  deinde  in  lacum  ilium  caenosum,  et  rursum 
in  carcerem.' 

'  He  was  taken  from  prison  and  judgment/  that  is,  he  was 
at  length  dehvered.  He  calls  it  judgment,  because  these 
evils  were  imposed  on  him  with  a  pretence  of  judgment. 
But  he  was  freed  by  the  Babylonians ;  who  shall  declare 
his  generation?  '  Who  shall  be  able  to  number  the  days  of 
his  life  V  that  is,  he  shall  live  very  long.  '  For  he  was  cut  off 
out  of  the  land  of  the  living,'  namely,  when  he  was  thrown 
into  the  prison,  and  then  into  the  miry  pit,  and  then  into 
prison  again.  He  adds,  '  Propter  scelus  populi  mei  percussi 
sum,']  in  Heb.  '  est  plaga  ipsi  (supple  supervenit)  populi 
summo  errore,  ac  crimine,  ut  ante  dictum  est.'  *  For  the 
wickedness  of  my  people  I  have  stricken  him,'  in  the  He- 
brew it  is,  '  Stroke  it  on  him,'  that  is,  befel  him,  through 
the  great  error  and  fault  of  the  people,  as  is  before  said.'  So 
far  he. 

The  sense  of  these  words  being  a  little  tried  out,  their 
application  will  be  manifest.  The  first  words  are  not  without 
their  difficulty,  ny^D  '  from  prison'  say  we.  The  word  is 
from  "i2fy,  '  prohibere,' '  coercere  ;'  to  'forbid'  and  'restrain  :' 
and  is  no  where  used  for  a  prison  directly.  The  LXX  have 
rendered  it,  Iv  ry  rairnvMcrei  r\  Kpicrig  avrov  vp^rj,  in  his  humility 
or  humiliation,  his  judgment  or  sentence  was  taken  away; 
refering  one  of  the  words  to  one  thing,  and  another  to  ano- 
ther. The  Vulgar  Latin,  '  Angustia,  Arias  Mountanus,  clau- 
sura :  Junius,  per  coarctationem  :'  rendering  the  preposition 
by,  not  from.  The  word  is  rendered  by  us,  '  oppression;' 
Psal.  cvii.  39.  it  is  at  the  utmost  in  reference  to  a  prison, 
*  claustrum,'  a  place  where  any  may  be  shut  up  ;  but  may  as 
well  be  rendered  '  angustia,'  with  the  Vulgar  Latin ;  better 
'  coarctation,'  with  Junius,  being  taken  for  any  kind  of  strait 
and  restraint.  And,  indeed,  properly  our  Saviour  was  not 
cast  into  a  prison,  though  he  was  all  night  under  restraint. 
If  the  intendment  of  the  words  be  about  what  he  was  de- 
livered  from,  under  which  he  was ;  and  not  what  he  was 


98  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

delivered  from,  that  he  should  not  undergo  it,  DD12/0D1  and 
'from  judgment,'  there  is  no  difficulty  in  the  word.  Only 
whose  judgment  it  is,  that  he  was  taken  from,  is  worth  in- 
quiry ;  whether  that  of  God  or  man  :  npb  he  was  taken,  'ub- 
latus  est.'  The  Vulgar  Latin,  '  he  was  taken  up.'  np^  is  *  ca- 
pere,  accipere,  ferre,  toUere,'  a  word  of  very  large  use,  both 
in  a  good,  and  in  a  bad  sense ;  *  to  be  taken  up/  it  will 
scarcely  be  found  to  signify ;  '  to  be  taken  away,'  very 
often. 

Now  the  sense  of  these  words  is,  that  either  Christ  was 
taken  away,  that  is,  killed  and  slain  by  his  pressures,  and 
the  pretended  judgment  that  was  passed  on  him,  or  else 
that  he  was  delivered  from  the  straits  and  judgment,  that 
might  have  come  upon  him.  Although  he  was  so  afflicted, 
yet  he  was  taken  away  from  distress  and  judgment.  Junius 
would  have  the  former  sense ;  and  the  exegesis  of  the  word, 
taken  away,  by  the  following  words,  *  he  was  cut  off  from 
the  land  of  the  living,'  seem  to  require  it.  In  that  sense  the 
words  are,  by  durance,  restraint,  affliction  and  judgment, 
either  the  righteous  judgment  of  God,  as  Junius,  or  the  pre- 
tended juridical  process  of  men,  he  was  taken  away  or  slain. 
If  I  go  off  from  this  sense  of  the  words,  of  all  other  appre- 
hensions, I  should  cleave  to  that  of  eternal  restraint  or  con- 
demnation, from  which  Christ  was  delivered  in  his  greatest 
distress;  Isa.  1.  7,  8.  Heb.  v.  7.  Though  his  afflictions  were 
great,  and  his  pressures  sore,  yet  he  was  delivered  from 
eternal  restraint  and  condemnation ;  it  being  not  possible 
that  he  should  be  detained  of  death. 

Applying  all  this  to  Jeremiah,  says  Grotius,  he  was  *  de- 
livered from  prison  and  judgment  by  the  Babylonians.'  That 
tlpb  is  delivered,  and  that  he  was  delivered  by  the  Babylo- 
nians from  judgment,  after  that  judgment  had  passed  on 
him,  and  sentence  been  executed  for  many  months,  is 
strange.     But  let  us  proceed  to  what  follows. 

'  Who  shall  declare  his  generation?'  Who  shall  speak  it, 
or  be  able  to  speak  it?  nn  'his  generation.'  *in  is  'aatas, 
generatio,  seeculum  :'  Gr.  yevta.  ttiv  ytveav  avrov  dg  ^fny'>](ye- 
rai;  who  shall  *  expound  his  generation,'  or  declare  it;  that 
is,  though  he  be  so  taken  away  by  oppression  and  judgment, 
yet  his  continuance,  his  generation,  his  abiding  shall  be 
such,  as  'Quis  eloquetur?'  Who  shall  speak  it?  It  shall  be 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  99 

for  ever  and  ever  ;  for  he  was  to  be  *  satisfied  with  long,  or 
eternal  life,  and  therein  to  see  the  salvation  of  God.' 

This  is,  says  Grotius,  *  Who  can  declare  the  generation 
of  Jeremiah?  he  shall  live  so  great  a  space  of  time.'  He 
began  his  prophecy  when  he  was  *  very  young ;'  chap.  i.  5. 
even  in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah  ;  and  he  continued  pro- 
phesying in  Jerusalem  until  the  eleventh  year  of  Zedekiah, 
about  forty  years;  and  how  long  he  lived  after  this  is  un- 
certain. Probably  he  might  live  in  all  sixty  years;  whereas 
it  is  evident  that  Hosea  prophesied  eighty  years  or  very 
near.  Now  that  this  should  be  so  marvellous  a  thing,  that 
a  man  should  live  sixty  or  seventy  years,  that  God  should 
foretel  it,  as  a  strange  thing,  above  twice  so  many  years  be- 
fore, and  express  it  by  way  of  admiration,  that  none  should 
be  able  to  declare  it,  is  such  an  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
as  becomes  not  the  learned  annotator.  Let  the  learned 
reader  consult  Abarbinel's  accommodation  of  these  words 
to  Josiah,  and  he  will  see  what  shifts  the  poor  man  is  put  to 
to  give  them  any  tolerable  sense. 

'  For  he  was  cut  off  out  of  the  land  of  the  living.'  on 
aigtrai  otto  Tr\Q  -yTJc  i?  ^WJ?  avrov.  '  His  life  was  taken  from 
the  earth:'  to  the  sense,  not  the  letter:  1?J3  'cut  off,'  as  a 
branch  is  cut  off  a  tree  ;  "in  is  'abscindere,  succidere,  exti- 
dere,'  to  cut  off.  The  'land  of  the  living,'  is  the  state  and  con- 
dition of  them  that  live  in  this  world ;  so  that  to  be  cut  off 
from  the  land  of  the  living,  is  a  proper  expression  for  to  be 
slain,  as  in  reference  to  Christ  it  is  expressed  by  another 
word,  Dan.  ix.  26.  The  meaning  of  this  is,  says  Orotius, 'Je- 
remiah was  cast  into  the  prison,  and  into  the  miry  lake.  He 
was  cut  off  out  of  the  land  of  the  living ;'  that  is,  he  was  put 
into  prison  twice,  and  taken  out  again.  If  this  be  not  to 
offer  violence  to  the  word  of  God,  I  know  not  what  is.  The 
learned  man  confesses,  that  this  whole  prophecy  belongs  to 
Christ  also  ;  but  he  leaves  no  sense  to  the  words,  whereby 
they  possibly  maybe  applied  to  him.  How  was  Christ  cast 
into  prison,  and  a  miry  pit,  and  taken  out  from  thence  by 
the  way  of  deliverance? 

'  For  the  transgression  of  my  people  was  he  sUicken.' 
Of  the  sense  of  this  expression,  that  Christ  was  smitten,  or 
that  the  stroke  of  punishment  was  upon  him  for  our  sins,  or 
the  sins  of  God's  people,  I  have  spoken  before.     Grotius 


100  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHIUST. 

would  have  it,  by  the  sins,  that  is,  the  '  people  sinned  in 
doing  of  it ;'  that  is,  in  putting  Jeremiah  into  prison.  The 
whole  context  evidently  manifests,  and  the  preposition  in 
the  relation  wherein  it  stands  to  sin  and  punishment,  neces- 
sarily requires,  that  the  impulsive  and  meritorious,  not  the 
efficient  cause,  be  denoted  thereby. 

Ver.  9.  'And  he  made  his  grave  with  the  wicked,  and 
with  the  rich  in  his  death,  because  he  had  done  no  violence, 
nor  was  any  deceit  in  his  month.' 

•  Et  dabit  impios  pro  sepultura  et  divitem  pro  morte  sua.] 
Illi  ipsi  interficere  eum  etiam  voluerant,  ut  legimus  Je- 
rera.  xxvi.  At  Deus  istius  vice  viros  potentes  quidem,  sed 
improbos,  sacerdotes  nempe,  mortem  Jeremise  machinatos, 
morti  dedit  per  Chaldseos;'  2  Reg.  xxv.  18 — 21.  Nihil  illis 
divitiae  suae  profuerunt,  quibus  redimi  se  posse  speraverant. 
Eo  quod  iniquitatem  non  fecerit,  neque  dolus  fuerit  in  ore 
ejus.]  quanquam  nihil  aliud  dixerat,  quam  quod  Deus  ei  man- 
daverat.' 

'  And  he  shall  give  the  wicked  for  his  grave  or  burial, 
and  the  rich  for  his  death.  They  would  have  slain  him,  as 
we  read ;  Jerem.  xxvi.  But  God  gave  them,  that  were 
very  powerful  indeed,  but  wicked,  even  the  priests  that  de- 
signed his  death,  up  to  death  by  the  Chaldeans,  2  Kings 
xxv.  18.  their  riches,  whereby  they  hoped  to  redeem  them- 
selves, profited  them  nothing, — although  he  had  not  said  any 
thing,  but  what  God  commanded  him.' 

It  is  confessed,  that  the  first  words  are  full  of  difficulty, 
and  various  are  the  interpretations  of  them :  which  the 
reader  may  consult  in  expositors-  It  is  not  my  work  at  pre- 
sent to  comment  on  the  text,  but  to  consider  its  accommo- 
dation by  Grotius.  The  most  single  sense  of  the  words  to 
me  seems  to  be,  that  Christ  being  cut  off  from  the  land  of 
the  living,  had  his  sepulchre  among  wicked  men,  being  taken 
down  from  the  cross  as  a  malefactor,  and  yet  was  buried  in 
the  '  grave  of  a  rich  man,'  by  Joseph  of  Arimathea  in  his 
own  grave;  the  consent  of  which  interpretation  with  the 
text,  is  discovered  by  Forsterus  and  Mercerus,  names  of 
sufficient  authority  in  all  Hebrew  literature.  The  sens.?  that 
Grotius  fixes  on,  is,  that  *  God  delivered  Jeremiah  from 
death,  and  gave  others  to  be  slain  in  his  stead,  who  had  con- 
trived his  death.'     But, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  101 

1.  Of  deliverance  from  death  here  is  no  mention  ;  yea  he 
who  is  spoken  of,  was  vnon  '  in  mortibus  ejus,'  in  his  deaths, 
or  under  death  and  its  power.  So  that  it  is  not,  others  shall 
die  for  him,  but,  he  being  dead,  under  the  power  of  death, 
his  grave,  or  burial,  or  sepulchre,  shall  be  so  disposed  of. 

2.  There  is  not  any  word  spoken  of  putting  others  to 
death;  but  of  giving,  or  placing  his  grave  with  the  wicked. 
Nor  were  those  mentioned  in  2  Kings  xxv.  18,  19.  that  were 
slain  by  the  king  of  Babel,  as  it  doth  any  way  appear,  of 
the  peculiar  enemies  of  Jeremiah  ;  the  chief  of  them  Seraiah, 
being  probably  he,  to  whom  Jeremiah  gave  his  prophecy 
against  Babylon,  who  is  said  to  be  a  '  quiet  prince ;'  Jer. 
li.  59.  61. 

3.  It  is  well  that  it  is  granted,  that  pro  is  as  much  as 
vice ;  '  for  one,'  in  one's  stead ;  which  the  learned  annotator's 
friends  will  scarce  allow. 

4.  The  application  of  those  words, '  He  did  no  violence, 
nor  was  there  any  deceit  found  in  his  mouth'  (which  are 
used  to  express  the  absolutely  perfect  innocency  of  the  Son 
of  God),  to  any  man,  who  as  a  man  is,  or  was  a  liar,  is  little 
less  than  blasphemy,  -and  to  restrain  them  to  the  prophet's 
message  from  God,  is  devoid  of  all  pretence  of  plea. 

Ver.  10.  'Yet  it  pleased  the  Lord  to  bruise  him  ;  he  shall 
put  him  to  grief;  when  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering 
for  sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his  days,  and 
the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall  prosper  in  his  hand.' 

'Tamen  Deo  visum  est  eum  conterere  and  infirmare.] 
id  est,  attenuare  fame,  illuvie,  squalore ;  verba  activa  apud 
Hebraebs  saepe  permittendi  habent  significationem ;  causa 
sequitur,  cur  id  Deus  permiserit.  Si  posuerit  pro  delicto 
animam  suam,  videbit  semen  longaevum.]  verteris  recte :  ut 
cum  semetipsum  subjecerit  panis,  videat  semen,  diuque 
vivat.  Hebrseis  paena  etiam  injuste  irrogata  CD'i^^k  dicitur, 
quia  infligitur  si  non  sonti,  certe  quasi  sonti ;  sic  xion  sumi 
apparet,'  Gen.  xxxi.  39.  Zech.  xiv.  19.  •  Vixit  diu  Jeremias 
in  Egypto.' 

'  Yet  it  seemed  good  to  God  to  bruise  and  weaken  him. 
that  is,  to  weaken  him,  and  bring  him  down  by  hunger,  filth 
&c.  Active  verbs  among  the  Hebrews,  have  often  the  sig- 
nification of  permitting;  the  reason  follows,  why  God  suf- 
fered this.     If  he  make  his  soul,  &c.    You   sliall  rightly 


102  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

read  it,  that  when  he  hath  submitted  himself  to  punish- 
ments, that  then  he  may  see  his  seed  and  live  long. 
Amongst  the  Hebrews  punishment  unjustly  inflicted,  is 
called  asham,  because  it  is  inflicted  on  him  that  is  guilty  or 
supposed  so.  So  it  is  evident,  that  chata  is  taken  Gen. 
xxxi.  39.  Zech.  xiv.  19.  Jeremiah  lived  long  in  Egypt.' 

The  words  and  sense  are  both  briefly  to  be  considered. 
\*Dn  '  voluit,'  the  Lord  would  bruise  him,  *  delectatus  est  ;* 
Jun.  It  pleased  the  Lord,  say  we.  The  Greek  renders  this 
word  IdovXerai,  properly ;  although  in  the  following  words 
it  utterly  departs  from  the  original.  The  word  is  not  only 
*  veste,'  but  *  voluntatem  seu  complacentiam  habere,'  to  take 
delight  to  do  the  thing,  and  in  the  doing  of  it,  which  we  will 
to  be  done  ;  Numb.  xiv.  8.  Judges  xiii.  23.  Our  translation 
refers  it  to  the  purpose,  and  good  pleasure  of  God  ;  so  is 
the  word  used  Jonah  i.  14.  and  in  sundry  other  places.'  The 
noun  of  the  same  signification  is  used  again  in  this  verse, 
^Dn  and  translated,  '  the  pleasure  j  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord 
shall  prosper;'  that  is,  the  thing  which  pleases  him,  and 
which  he  hath  purposed  to  do.  The  purpose  and  pleasure 
of  the  Lord  in  giving  Christ  up  to  death  ;  Acts  ii.  23.  and 
iv.  26,  27.  is  doubtless  that  which  the  prophet  here  intends; 
which  also  as  to  the  execution  of  it,  is  farther  expressed  ; 
Zech.  xiii.  7. 

2.  It  pleased  the  Lord,  Mi'Dl  '  eum  contundere;  conterere, 
frangere ;'  to  bruise,  or  break  him ;  in  answer  to  what  was 
said  before,  ver.  5.  *  he  was  wounded,  he  was  bruised,'  &c. 

That  which  is  said  to  accommodate  all  this  to  Jeremiah, 
is  that  by  all  this  is  intended,  that  God  permitted  it  to  be 
done  to  him.     But, 

1.  The  word  T^sn  is  nowhere  used  in  that  sense, 
nor  will  any  where  bear  that  interpretation.  And  though 
some  active  verbs  in  the  Hebrew  may  be  interpreted  in  a 
sense  of  permitting,  or  suffering  the  thing  to  be  done,  which 
is  said  to  be  done;  yet  that  all  may  so  be  interpreted  when 
we  please,  without  a  cogent  reason  of  such  an  interpretation ; 
that  this  verb  signifying  not  only  to  will,  but  with  delight 
and  purpose,  should  be  so  interpreted,  and  that  in  this  place, 
not  admitting  of  such  a  gloss  in  any  other  place,  is  that 
which  was  needful  to  be  said  by  the  learned  annotator ;  but 
with  what  pretence  of  reason  or  truth,  I  know  not. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  103 

2.  As  to  Christ,  to  whom  he  confesseth  these  words  pro- 
perly to  belong,  the  proper  sense  of  the  word  is  to  be  re- 
tained, as  hath  been  shewed ;  and  it  is  very  marvellous,  the 
improper  sense  of  the  word  should  be  used  in  reference  to 
him,  to  whom  it  nextly  belongs ;  and  the  proper,  in  refe- 
rence to  him,  who  is  more  remotely,  and  secondarily  sig- 
nified. 

For  the  second  passage  ;  '  when,'  or  *  if,  thou  or  he  shall 
make  his  soul  an  oflPering  for  sin;'  or  as  it  may  be  read,  *  when 
his  soul  shall  make  an  offering  for  sin  ;'  it  may  relate  either 
to  God,  giving  him  up  for  a  sacrifice,  his  soul  for  his  whole 
human  nature  ;  or  to  Christ,  whose  soul  was,  or  who  of- 
fered himself  as  a  sacrifice  to  God  ;  Eph.  v.  2.  Which  way 
soever  it  be  taken,  it  is  peculiar  to  Christ ;  for  neither  did 
God  ever  make  any  one  else  an  offering  for  sin,  nor  did 
ever  any  person  but  Christ,  make  himself  an  offering,  or 
had  power  so  to  do,  or  would  have  been  accepted  in  so  do- 
ing. To  suit  these  words  to  Jeremiah,  it  is  said,  that  CDli'K 
in  the  Hebrew,  signifies  any  punishment,  though  unjustly 
inflicted. 

I  will  not  say  that  the  learned  annotator  affirms  this, 
with  a  mind  to  deceive  ;  but  yet  I  cannot  but  think,  that  as 
he  hath  not  given,  so  he  could  not  give  one  instance  out  of 
the  Scripture,  of  that  use  of  the  word  which  he  pretends. 
This  I  am  sure,  that  his  assertion  hath  put  me  to  the  labour, 
of  considering  all  the  places  of  Scripture,  where  the  w^ord 
is  used,  in  the  full  collections  of  Calasius  ;  and  I  dare  con- 
fidently assure  the  reader,  that  there  is  no  colour  for  this 
assertion,  nor  instance  to  make  it  good.  The  Greeks  have 
rendered  it  irepi  ojuapriac, '  an  offering  for  sin;'  as  is  expressed, 
Rom.  viii.  3.  Heb.  x.  5.  8.  so  the  word  is  used  Lev.  v.  16. 
vii.  1.  But, 

If  CDii>N  be  not  used  in  that  sense,  yet  Nion  is,  in  Gen. 
xxxi.  39.  Zech.  xiv.  19.  But, 

1.  This  doth  not  satisfy,  if  this  word  may  not  be  so  in- 
terpreted, which  is  here  used  ;  yet  another,  which  is  not 
here  used,  may  be  so  interpreted  ;  and  therefore,  that  which 
is  here  used,  must  have  the  same  sense.     Nor, 

2.  Can  he  prove  that  NIDn  hath  any  other  signification, 
but  either  of  sin,  or  punishment,  or  satisfaction  ;  in  the  first 
place  instanced  in,  Gen.  xxxi.  39.  Jacob  says,  that,  for  that 


104  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

which  was  taken  away  out  of  the  flock  of  Laban,  he  ex- 
piated it,  he  made  satisfaction  for  it,  as  the  law  afterward 
required  in  such  cases  should  be  done;  Exod.xxii.  12.  And 
in  that  place  of  Zech.  xiv.  19.  it  is  precisely  punishment  for 
sin.     But  this  word  is  not  in  our  text. 

Take  then  the  word  in  any  sense  that  it  will  admit  of,  to 
apply  this  expression  to  Jeremiah,  is  no  less  than  blas- 
phemy. To  say  that  either  God,  or  himself  made  him  a 
sacrifice  for  sin,  is  to  blaspheme  the  one  sacrifice  of  the  Son 
of  God. 

For  the  next  words,  *  he  shall  see  his  seed,'  Grotius  knows 
not  how  to  make  any  application  of  them  to  Jeremiah,  and 
therefore  he  speaks  nothing  of  them.  How  they  belong  to 
Christ  is  evident,  Psal.  xxii.  30.  Heb.  ii.  8,  9.  that,  'he 
shall  prolong  his  days,'  is  not  applicable  to  Jeremiah,  of 
whom  the  annotator  knew  not  how  long  he  lived  in  Egypt, 
hath  been  formerly  declared.  Christ  prolonged  his  days, 
in  that  notwithstanding  that  he  was  dead,  he  is  alive,  and 
lives  for  ever. 

The  last  clause  concerning  the  prospering  of  the  good 
pleasure,  the  will,  and  pleasure  of  the  Lord,  in  the  hand  of 
Jesus  Christ,  for  the  gathering  of  his  church,  through  his 
blood,  and  making  peace  between  God  and  man,  hath  little 
relation  to  any  thing,  that  is  spoken  of  Jeremiah,  whose 
ministry  for  the  conversion  of  souls,  doth  not  seem  to  have 
had  any  thing  eminent  in  it  above  other  prophets  ;  yea  fall- 
ing in  a  time,  when  the  wickedness  of  the  people,  to  whom 
he  was  sent,  was  come  up  to  the  height,  his  message  seemed 
to  be  almost  totally  rejected. 

Ver.  11.  '  He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and  shall 
be  satisfied;  by  his  knowledge  shall  my  righteous  servant 
justify  many,  for  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities.' 

The  event,  and  glorious  issue  of  the  suffering  of  Christ, 
in  respect  of  himself  and  others,  with  the  reason  thereof,  is 
briefly  comprised  and  expressed  in  this  verse. 

*  Videbit  et  saturabitur.]  videbit  diu  ad  satietatem :  simile 
loquendi  genus  in  Hebrseo,  Gen.  xxv.  8.  xxxv.  19.  1  Paral. 
xxiii.  1.  xxix.  28.  2  Paral.  xxiv.  14. 

'In  scienlia  sua.]  per  eam  quamhabet  Dei  cognitionem. 

'  Justificabit  ipse  Justus  servus  meus  multos.]  Exemplo 
et  institutione  corriget  multos  etiam  ex  gentibus.     Hsec  est 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION^    OF    CHRIST,  105 

maxime  propria  verbi,  pnjfTi  significatio,  et  GrsBci  StKotoc, 
ut  apparet  Dan.  xii.  3.  Apocal.  xxii.  11.  et  alibi  ssepe. 

*Et  iniquitates  eorum  ipse  portabit.]  id  est,  auferet,  per 
fjiiTiovvijlav,  quia  qui  sordes  aliquas  auferunt,  solent  eos  collo 
supposito  portare.  Abstulit  Jeremias  multorum  peccata,  ita 
ut  diximus,  corrigendo.' 

'He  shall  see  and  be  satisfied  :'  He  shall  see  long,  unto 
satiety  ;  the  like  phrase  of  speech  you  have  in  the  Hebrew  ; 
Gen.  XXV.  8,  8lc.  '  By  his  knowledge.'  By  that  knowledge 
which  he  hath  of  God.  '  He  shall  justify  many.'  By  his  ex- 
ample and  institution  he  shall  convert  many,  even  from 
among  the  heathen  :  this  is  the  most  proper  sense  of  the  word 
pHKn  and  ofdiKaioc  in  the  Greek;  as  appeareth  Dan.  xii.  3. 
Rev.  xxii.  11 ;  Sec.  'For  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities,'  that 
is,  take  them  away  by  a  metonymy  ;  because  those  that  take 
away  filth,  used  to  take  it  on  their  necks,  and  bear  it.  Je- 
remiah took  away  the  sins  of  many,  as  was  said,  by  correct- 
ing or  amending  them.' 

The  intelligent  reader  will  easily  perceive  the  whole  So- 
cinian  poison,  about  the  death  of  Christ,  to  be  infolded  in 
this  interpretation.  His  knowledge  is  the  '  knowledge'  that 
he  had  of  God,  and  his  will,  which  he  declares  :  to  'justify,' 
is  to  'amend  men's  lives,'  and  to  'bear  sin,'  is  to  take  it 
away.  According  to  the  analogy  of  this  faith,  you  may 
apply  the  text  to  whom  you  please,  as  well  as  to  Jeremiah. 
But  the  words  are  of  another  import,  as  we  shall  briefly 
see. 

1 .  Those  words  iii^Di  ^DJ/D  which  the  Vulgar  Latin  renders 
'  pro  eo  quod  laboravit :'  ad  verbum, '  propter  laborem  animae 
suffi,'  which  express  the  object  of  the  seeing  mentioned,  and 
that  wherewith  he  was  satisfied,  are  not  taken  notice  of. 
The  '  travail  of  the  soul'  of  Christ,  is  the  fruit  of  his  '  labour, 
travail,'  and  suffering  :  this,  says  the  prophet,  he  '  shall  see,' 
that  is,  'receive,  perceive,  enjoy;'  as  the  verb  nXT  in 
many  places  signifies ;  verbs  of  sense,  with  the  Hebrews, 
having  very  large  significations:  yili'>  'saturabitur,'he  shall 
be  '  full  and  '  well-contented,'  and  pleased  with  the  fruit 
that  he  shall  have  of  all  his  labour  and  travail.  This  (saith 
Grotius)  is,  '  he  shall  see  to  satiety,'  whereby  he  intends  he 
should  '  live  very  long,'  as  is  evident  from  the  places  whither 
he  sends  us  for  an  exposition  of  these  words  ;  Gen.  xxv,  8, 

VOL.  IX.  I 


106  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

&c.  in  all  which  mention  is  made  of  men  that  were  old,  and 
'  full  of  days.' 

1.  But  to  '  live  to  satiety,'  is  to  live  till  a  man  be  weary 
of  living,  which  may  not  be  ascribed  to  the  prophet. 

2.  This  of  his  '  long  life,'  was  spoken  of  immediately 
before,  according  to  the  interpretation  of  our  annotator^ 
and  is  not,  probably,  instantly  again  repeated. 

3.  The  long  life  of  Jeremiah,  by  way  of  eminency  above 
others,  is  but  pretended,  as  Hath  been  evinced.     But, 

4.  How  came  this  word  *  to  see,'  to  be  taken  neutrally, 
and  to  signify  '  to  live  V  What  instance  of  this  sense,  or  use 
of  the  word,  can  be  given  ?  I  dare  boldly  say,  not  one.  He 
shall  *  see  unto  satiety,'  that  is,  '  he  shall  live  long.' 

5.  The  words  'videbit,  saturabitur,'  do  not  stand  in  any 
such  relation  to  one  another  or  construction,  as  to  endure  to 
be  cast  into  this  form  :  it  is  not  '  videbit  diu  ad  satietatem  j' 
much  less  '  vivetad  satietatem,'  but  *  videbit,  saturabitur.' 

6.  The  word  '  shall  see,'  evidently  relates  to  the  words 
going  before,  *  the  travail  of  his  soul.'  If  it  had  been  'he 
shall  see  many  years,  or  many  days,  and  be  satisfied,'  it  had 
been  something.  But  it  is,  *  he  shall  see  of  the  travail  of 
his  soul,  and  be  satisfied.' 

2.  By  his  knowledge  ^nv^^  '  in,'  or  '  by  his  knowledge,' 
'in  scientia  sua,'  Vulg.  Lat. 'Cognitione  sui,' Jun.  The  LXX 
wholly  pervert  all  the  words  of  this  verse,  except  the  last, 
as  they  do  also  of  the  former.  That  by  the  'knowledge' 
here  mentioned,  is  meant  the  knowledge  of  Christ  taken  ob- 
jectively, and  not  the  knowledge  of  God  taken  actively,  as 
our  annotator  supposes,  is  evident  from  the  fruit  that  is  as- 
cribed hereunto,  which  is  the  justification  of  them  that  have 
that  knowledge.  By  his  knowledge,  that  is,  the  '  knowledge 
of  him,'  they  shall  be  justified,  Phil.  iii.  8.  So,  'teach  me 
thy  fear,'  that  is,  'the  fear  of  thee;'  'my  worship,'  that  is, 
'  the  worship  of  me.'  No  'knowledge  of  God'  in  the  land. 
But  the  use  of  this  is  in  the  next  words. 

'  My  righteous  servant  shall  justify  many :'  that  this  term, 
used  thus  absolutely,  *  My  righteous  servant,'  is  not  applied 
to  any  in  the  Scripture  besides  Jesus  Christ,  hath  been  de- 
clared, especially  where  that  is  ascribed  to  him,  which  here 
is  spoken  of,  can  it  be  no  otherwise  understood :  p»*72^> '  shall 
justify,'  that  is,  shall  absolve  from  their  sins,  and  pronounce 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  107 

them  righteous.  Grotius  would  have  the  word  here  to  sig- 
nify, '  to  make  holy  and  righteous  by  instruction'  and  insti- 
tution, as  Dan.  xii.3.  and  ^LKaiog,  Rev.  xxii.  11.  That  both 
these  words  are  to  be  taken  in  a  forensical  signification,  that 
commonly,  mostly  they  are  so  taken  in  the  Scriptures,  that 
scarce  one  and  another  instance  can  be  given  to  the  con- 
trary; that  in  the  matter  of  our  acceptation  with  God  through 
Christ  they  can  no  otherwise  be  interpreted,  hath  been 
abundantly  manifested  by  those  who  have  written  of  the 
doctrine  of  justification  at  large;  that  is  not  now  my  pre- 
sent business.  This  I  have  from  the  text,  to  lay  in  the  way 
of  the  interpretation  of  the  learned  annotator :  the  reason 
and  foundation  of  this  justification  here  mentionefi,  is  in  the 
following  words,  which  indeed  steer  the  sense  of  the  whole 
text.  *  For  he  shall  bear  their  iniquities.'  Now  what  justi- 
fication of  men  is  a  proper  effect  of  another's  bearing  their 
iniquities  ?  Doubtless  the  acquitting  of  them  from  the  guilt 
of  their  sins,  on  the  account  of  their  sins  being  so  borne, 
and  no  other.     But, 

Says  our  annotator,  *  To  bear  their  sins,  is  to  take  them 
away,'  by  a  figurative  expression.  If  this  may  not  be  under- 
stood, I  suppose  every  one  will  confess  that  the  annotator 
hath  laboured  in  vain,  as  to  his  whole  endeavour  of  applying 
this  prophecy  unto  Jeremiah.  If  by  '  bearing  our  iniquities,' 
be  intended  the  undergoing  of  the  punishment  of  those  ini- 
quities, and  not  the  delivering  men  from  their  iniquities,  the 
whole  matter  here  treated  of  can  relate  to  none  but  Jesus 
Christ ;  and  to  him  it  doth  relate  in  the  sense  contended 
for.  Now  to  evince  this  sense  we  have  all  the  arguments 
that  any  place  is  capable  to  receive  the  confirmation  of  its 
proper  sense  by. 

For,  1.  The  word,  as  is  confessed,  signifies  properly  to 
*bear,'  or  'carry,'  and  not  to  'take  away.'  Nor  is  it  ever 
otherwise  used  in  the  Scripture,  as  hath  been  declared;  and 
the  proper  use  of  a  word  is  not  to  be  departed  from,  and  a 
figurative  admitted  without  great  necessity. 

2.  The  whole  phrase  of  speech  of  *  bearing  iniquity'  is 
constantly  in  the  Scripture  used  for  bearing  or  undergoing 
the  punishment  due  to  sin,  as  hath  been  proved  by  instances 
in  abundance  ;  nor  can  any  instance  to  the  contrary  be  pro- 
duced. 

I  2 


108  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

3.  The  manner  whereby  Christ '  bore  the  iniquities  of  men/ 
as  described  in  this  chapter,  namely,  by  being  '  wounded/ 
'  bruised/  *  put  to  grief/  will  admit  of  no  interpretation,  but 
that  by  us  insisted  on.  From  all  which  it  is  evident,  how 
violently  the  Scripture  is  here  perverted  by  rendering,  '  My 
righteous  servant  shall  justify  many,  for  he  shall  bear  their 
iniquities,'  by,  '  Jei-emiah  shall  instruct  many  in  godliness, 
and  so  turn  them  from  their  sins.' 

Ver.  the  last.  'Therefore  will  I  divide  him  a  portion 
with  the  great,  and  he  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong, 
because  he  hath  poured  out  his  soul  unto  death,  and  he  was 
numbered  with  transgressors,  and  he  bare  the  sins  of  many, 
and  made  intercession  for  the  transgressors/ 

A  farther  fruit  of  the  travail  of  the  Lord  Christ  in  his 
conquest  over  all  oppositions,  in  the  victory  he  obtained, 
the  spoils  that  he  made,  expressed  after  the  manner  of  the 
things  of  men,  with  the  causes  and  antecedents  of  his  exalta- 
tion, is  summarily  comprised  in  these  last  words.  Hereof 
thus  Grotius. 

'Dispartiam  ei  plurimos.']  'Dabo  ei  partem  in  multis  :  id 
est,  multos  servabunt  Chaldsei  in  ejus  gratiam,'  vide  Jer. 
xxxix.  17.  Et  fortium  dividet  spolia;]  id  est,  Nabuzardan 
Magister  militum,  capta  urbe,  de  pra?da  ipsi  dona  mittet. 
Jer.  xl.  5.  Oblatus  etiam  ipsi  a  Chaldseis  locus  quantum 
vellet.  Pro  eo  quod  tradidit  in  mortem  animam  suam]  in 
Hebrseo,  Quia  effudit  in  mortem  animam  suam,  id  est,  pe- 
riculis  mortis  semet  objecit,  colendo,  veritatem  quse  odium 
parit.  Vide  historiam  ad  banc  rem  oppositam,  Jer.  xxvi. 
13.  Sic  Ti^ivai  -ipvxnv  dici  pro  periculo  mortis  semet  obji- 
cere  diximus  ad,  John  x.  11.  Et  cum  sceleratis  reputatus 
est.']  Ita  est  tractatus  quo  modo  scelerati  solent  in  carcere, 
catenis  et  barathro.  Et  peccata  multorum  tulit]  pessime 
tractatus  fuitpermultorum  improbitatera  uti  sup.  ver.  5.  Et 
pro  transgressoribus  rogavit.]  j;>JD'  est  deprecari :  Sensus 
est,  eo  ipso  tempore  cum  tam  dura  poteretur  a  populis,  non 
cessavit  ad  Deum  pieces  pro  eis  fundere,  vide  Jer.  xiv. 
7.'  &c. 

'  I  will  divide  him  a  portion  with  the  great,'  or  many, 
that  is,  the  Chaldeans  shall  preserve  many  for  his  sake  ;  Jer. 
xxxix.  17.  *  He  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong/  that 
is,  Nabuzardan  the  chief  captain,  the  city  being  taken,  shall 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  109 

send  him  gifts  of  the  prey,  Jer.  xl.  5.  As  much  land  also  as 
he  would  was  offered  him  by  the  Chaldeans.  '  Because  he 
poured  out  his  soul  unto  death;'  that  is,  he  exposed  himself 
to  the  dangers  of  death,  by  following  truth,  which  begets 
hatred.  See  Jer.  xxvi.  13.  n^ivm  \pv)(fjv  is  spoken  for  ex- 
posing a  man's  life  to  danger  of  death.  *  He  bare  the  sin  of 
many,'  or  was  evilly  treated  by  the  wickedness  of  the  many. 
'  And  made  intercession  for  the  transgressors  ;'  he  prayed 
for  the  people,'  &c. 

To  run  briefly  over  this  exposition,  ' 

1.  '  I  will  divide  him  a  portion  with  the  great ;'  that  is, 
the  Chaldees  shall  save  many  for  his  sake.  How  is  this 
proved?  Jer.  xxxix.  17,  18.  Where  God  says,  *  he  will  save 
Ebedmelech,  because  he  put  his  trust  in  him.'  Such  is  the 
issue  commonly,  when  men  will  wrest  the  Scripture  to  their 
own  imaginations.  Such  are  their  proofs  of  what  they  af- 
firm. 

2.  •  He  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong  ;*  that  is, 
the  city  being  taken,  the  captains  of  the  guard  gave  him  vic- 
tuals, and  a  reward,  and  set  him  at  liberty,  as  we  read,  Jer. 
xl.  5. 

3.  '  Because  he  poured  out  his  soul  to  death  ;'  that  is,  he 
ventured  his  life  by  preaching  the  truth,  although  he  did 
not  die.     For, 

4.  '  He  bare  the  sin  of  many  :'  that  is,  by  the  '  wicked- 
ness of  many  he  was  wronged ;'  though  this  expression  in 
the  verse  foregoing  be  interpreted,  *  he  shall  take  away  their 
sins  ;'  and  that  when  a  word  of  a  more  restrained  significa- 
tion is  used  to  express  bearing,  than  that  here  used.  At  this 
rate  a  man  may  make  application  of  what  he  will,  to  whom 
he  will. 

Upon  the  sense  of  the  words,  and  their  accomplishment 
in  and  upon  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  I  shall  not  insist.  That 
they  do  not  respect  Jeremiah  at  all,  is  easily  evinced  from 
the  consideration  of  the  intolerable  wresting  of  the  words, 
and  their  sense  by  the  learned  annotator,  to  make  the 
least  allusion  appear  betwixt  what  befel  him,  and  what  is 
expressed. 

To  close  these  animadversions,  I  shall  desire  the  reader 
to  observe. 

1.  That  there  is  not  any  application  of  these  words  made 


110  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

to  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  that  suits  him  in  any  measure,  but 
what  may  also  be  made  to  any  prophet,  or  preacher  of  the 
word  of  God,  that  met  with  affliction  and  persecution  in  the 
discharge  of  his  duty,  and  was  delivered  by  the  presence  of 
God  with  him.  So  that  there  is  no  reason  to  persuade  us, 
that  Jeremiah  was  peculiarly  intended  in  this  prophecy. 

2.  That  the  learned  annotator,  though  he  profess  that 
Jesus  Christ  was  intended  in  the  letter  of  this  Scripture,  yet 
hath  interpreted  the  whole,  not  only  without  the  least  men- 
tion of  Jesus  Christ,  or  application  of  it  unto  him,  but  also 
hath  so  opened  the  several  words  and  expressions  of  it,  as  to 
leave  no  place  nor  room  for  the  main  doctrine  of  his  satisfac- 
tion here  principally  intended.  And  how  much  the  church 
of  God  is  beholding  to  him  for  his  pain  and  travail  herein, 
the  reader  may  judge. 


CHAP.  XXVI. 

Of  the  matter  of  the  punishment  that  Christ  underwent, 
or  what  he  suffered. 

Having  dispatched  this  digression,  1  return  again  to  the 
consideration  of  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  punishment 
which  shall  now  be  pursued  unto  its  issue. 

The  third  thing  proposed  to  the  consideration  on  this  ac- 
count, was  the  matter  of  this  punishment  that  Christ  under- 
went which  is  commonly  expressed  by  the  name  of  his  death. 

Death  is  a  name  comprehensive  of  all  evil,  of  what  na- 
ture, or  of  what  kind  soever.  All  that  was  threatened,  all 
that  was  ever  inflicted  on  man  :  though  much  of  it  fall  with- 
in the  compass  of  this  life,  and  short  of  death,  yet  it  is  evil 
purely  on  the  account  of  its  relation  to  death,  and  its  ten- 
dency thereunto ;  which,  when  it  is  taken  away,  it  is  no 
more  generally,  and  absolutely  evil,  but  in  some  regard 
only. 

The  death  of  Christ  as  comprehending  his  punishment, 
may  be  considered  two  ways. 

1.  In  itself. 

2.  In  reference  to  the  law. 

On  the  first  head,  I  shall  only  consider  the  general  evi- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  Ill 

dent  concomitants  of  it,  as  they  lie  in  the  story,  which  are 
all  set  down  as  aggravations  of  the  punishment  he  under- 
went. 

In  the  latter,  give  an  account  of  the  whole,  in  reference 
to  the  law. 

1.  Of  death  natural,  which  in  its  whole  nature  is  penal 
(as  hath  been  elsewhere  evinced)  there  are  four  aggravations 
whereunto  all  others  may  be  referred.  As,  1.  That  it  be  vio- 
lent or  bloody.  2.  That  it  be  ignominious  or  shameful.  3. 
That  it  be  lingering  and  painful.  4.  That  it  be  legal  and 
accursed.  And  all  these  to  the  height,  met  in  the  death  of 
Christ. 

1.  It  was  violent  and  bloody  ;  hence  he  is  said  to  be 

1.  Slain,  Acts  ii.  23  ;  avdXsTE, '  ye  have  slaiil.' 

2.  Killed,  Acts  iii.  15;  ainKTdvaTe,  *ye  have  killed.' 

3.  Put  to  death  ;  John  xviii.  31,  32. 

4.  Cut  off;  Dan.  ix.  26. 

The  death  of  Christ,  and  the  blood  of  Christ,  are,  on  this 
account,  in  the  Scripture  the  same.  His  death  was  by  the 
effusion  of  his  blood  ;  and  what  is  done  by  his  death,  is  still 
said  to  be  done  by  his  blood.  And  though  he  willingly  gave 
up  himself  to  God  therein,  as  he  was  a  sacrifice,  yet  he  was 
taken  by  violence  and  nailed  to  the  cross,  as  it  was  a  punish- 
ment J  and  the  dissolution  of  his  body  and  soul  was  by  a 
means  no  less  violent,  than  if  he  had  been  most  unwilling 
thereunto. 

2.  It  was  ignominious  and  shameful.  Such  was  the 
death  of  the  cross.*  The  death  of  slaves,  malefactors,  rob- 
bers, pests  of  the  earth,  and  burdens  of  human  society  ;  like 
those  crucified  with  him.  Hence  he  is  said  to  be  *  obedient 
to  death,  the  _death  of  the  cross,'  Phil.  ii.  8.  that  shameful 
and  ignominious  death.  And  when  he  endured  the  cross, 
he  despised  the  shame  also;  Heb.  xii.  2.     To  be  brought 

a  ZxeXojwwia,  seu  crucifragium  ut  crux  ipsa,  servorum  quasi  peculiare  suppliciuin 
fuit.  Lipsias.  Sublimes  extra  ordinera  aliqiiae  statuebanturcruces;  si  exenipla  edenda 
forent  in  famosa  persona,  et  ob  atrox  faciuus,  aut  si  hoc  suppiicio  veniret  afficiendus 
ille,  cujus  odium  erat  apud  omnes  flagrantissimum.  Salmas.  de  Cruce  :  which  seems 
to  be  the  case  in  the  cross  of  Christ  :  between  these  of  the  thieves.  Bene  addit 
crucem,  nam  servorum  non  civium  crucis  erat  suppliciura.  Nannius,  in  Tcrent.  And. 
Act.  3.  Noli  minitari,  Scio  crucem  futuram  mihi  sepuichrum  :  ibi  raei  niajores  sunt 
siti,  pater,  avus,  proavus,  abaviis  :  servus  apud  Plaut.  Mil.  Glor.  ii.  4.  19.  Vid. 
Trach.  Histor.  lib.  ii.  27.  Vulcat  in  Avid.  Cassio.  cap.  4.  Capitolin.  iu  Macrin.  cap. 
12.  Luc.  floras  lib.  3.  cap.  19. 


112  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

forth  scourged  as  a  malefactor,  amongst  malefactors,  in  the 
eye  of  the  world,  made  a  scorn  and  a  by-word,  men  wagging 
the  head,  and  making  mouths  at  him  in  derision,  when  he 
was  full  of  torture,  bleeding  to  death,  is  no  small  aggravation 
of  it.  Hence  the  most  frequent  expression  of  his  death  is  by 
the  cross,  and  crucifying. 

3.  It  was  lingering.  It  was  the  voice  of  cruelty  itself, 
concerning  one  who  was  condemned  to  die  :  *  sentiat  se  mori ;' 
'  let  him  so  die  that  he  may  feel  himself  dying  ;'  and  of  one, 
who,  to  escape  torture,  killed  himself,  '  evasit,'  *  he  escaped 
me :'  sudden  death,  though  violent,  is  an  escape  from  torture. 
Such  was  this  of  Christ.  From  his  agony  in  the  garden, 
when  he  began  to  die  (all  the  powers  of  hell  being  then  let 
loose  upon  him),  until  the  giving  up  of  the  Ghost,  it  was  from 
the  evening  of  one  day  to  the  evening  of  another ;  from  his 
scourging  by  Pilate,  after  which  he  was  under  continual 
pain,  and  suffering  in  his  soul,  in  his  body,  to  his  death, 
it  was  six  hours  ;  and  all  this  while  was  he  under  exquisite 
tortures,  as  on  very  many  considerations  might  easily  be 
manifest. 

4.  It  was  legal;  and  so  an  accursed  death.  There  was 
process  against  him  by  witness  and  judgment.  Though  they 
were  indeed  all  false  and  unjust,  yet,  to  the  eye  of  the  world, 
his  death  was  legal,  and  consequently  accursed  ;  Gal.  iii. 
13.  *  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree  ;'  that  is, 
because  of  the  doom  of  the  law,  whose  sentence  is  called  a 
curse  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  29.  such  was  that  of  Christ;    Isa.  liii.  4. 

2.  As  all  these  aggravations  attended  his  death,  as  it  was 
death  itself,  so  there  was  a  universality  in  ail  the  concern- 
ments of  it,  as  it  was  a  legal  punishment.  Briefly  to  give 
some  instances : 

1.  There  was  a  universality  of  efficient  causes;  whether 
principal  or  instrumental.  The  first  great  division  of  causes 
efficient,  is  into  the  Creator  and  the  creatures,  and  both  here 
concurred. 

1.  The  Creator,  God  himself,  laid  it  upon  him.  He  was 
not  only  '  delivered  by  his  determinate  counsel,'  Acts  ii.  22, 
23.  iv.  27,  28.  not  spared  by  him,  but  given  up  to  death ; 
Rom.  viii.  32.  but,  it  *  pleased  him  to  bruise  him,  and  to  put 
him  to  grief,'  Isa.  liii.  10.  as  also  to  forsake  him ;  Psal.  xxii. 
1.  so  acting  in  his  punishment,  by  the  immission  of  that 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  113 

which  is  evil,  and  the  subtraction  of  that  which  is  good  ;  so 
putting  the  cup  into  his  hand,  which  he  was  to  drink,  and 
mixing  the  wine  thereof  for  him,  as  shall  afterward  be  de- 
clared. 

2.  Of  creatures  one  general  division  is,  into  intelligent, 
and  brute  or  irrational,  and  both  these  also  in  their  several 
ways  concurred  to  his  punishment ;  as  they  were  to  do  by 
the  sentence  and  curse  of  the  law. 

Intelligeut  creatures  are  distinguished  into  spiritual  and 
invisible,  or  visible  and  corporeal  also. 

Of  the  first  sort  are  angels  and  devils ;  which  agree  in 
the  same  nature,  differing  only  in  qualities,  and  states  or 
conditions.  Of  all  things,  the  angels  seem  to  have  no  hand 
in  the  death  of  Christ;  for  being  not  judge,  as  was  God, 
nor  opposite  to  God  as  is  Satan,  nor  under  the  curse  of  the 
law,  as  is  mankind,  and  the  residue  of  the  creatures,  though 
they  had  inestimable  benefit  by  the  death  of  Christ,  yet  nei- 
ther by  demerit  nor  efficacy,  as  is  revealed,  did  they  add  to 
his  punishment.  Only  whereas  it  was  their  duty  to  have 
preserved  him  being  innocent,  and  in  his  way  from  violence 
and  fury,  their  assistance  was  withheld. 

But  from  that  sort  of  spiritual  invisible  creatures,  he  suf- 
fered in  the  attempts  of  the  devil. 

Christ  looked  on  him  at  a  distance  in  his  approach  to  set 
upon  him  :  '  The  prince  of  this  world,'  saith  he,  '  cometh ;' 
John  xiv.  30.  He  saw  him  coming  with  all  his  malice,  fury, 
and  violence,  to  set  upon  him,  to  ruin  him  if  it  were  possi- 
ble :  and  that  he  had  a  close  combat  with  him  on  the  cross, 
is  evident  from  the  conquest  that  Christ  there  made  of  him. 
Col.  ii.  15.  which  was  not  done  without  wounds,  and  blood, 
when  he  break  the  serpent's  head,  the  serpent  bruised  his 
heel;  Gen.  iii.  15. 

2.  For  men ;  the  second  rank  of  intellectual  creatures ; 
they  had  their  influence  into  this  punishment  of  Christ,  in 
all  their  distributions,  that  on  any  account  they  were  cast 
into. 

1.  In  respect  of  country  or  nation,  and  the  privileges 
thereon  attending.  The  whole  world  on  this  account  is  di- 
vided into  Jews  and  Gentiles ;  and  both  these  had  their  ef- 
ficiency in  this  business;  Psal.  ii.  1.  'Why  did  the  heathen 
rage,  and  the  people  imagine  a  vain  thing?'    Heathens  and 


114  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

people.  Gentiles  and  Jews,  are  all  in  it,  as  the  place  is  inter- 
preted by  the  apostles.  Acts  iv.  25,  26.  And  to  make  this 
the  more  eminent,  the  great  representative  of  the  two  people 
conspired  in  it ;  the  Sanhedrim  of  the  Jews,  and  the  body  of 
the  people  in  the  raetropolitical  city,  on  the  one  hand ;  and 
the  Romans,  for  the  Gentiles,  who  then  were  '  reruni  Domini,' 
and  governed  olnovfxtvriv,  as  Luke  tells  us,  chap.  ii.  1.  The 
whole  on  both  hands  is  expressed  Matt.  xx.  18,  19. 

2.  As  to  order,  men  are  distinguished  into  rulers,  and 
those  under  authority,  and  both  sorts  herein  concurred, 

1.  Rulers  are  either  civil  or  ecclesiastical ;  both  which 
(notwithstanding  all  their  divisions)  conspired  in  the  death 
of  Christ. 

1.  For  civil  rulers,  as  it  was  foretold,  Psal.ii.  2.  xxii.  12. 
so  it  was  accomplished.  Acts  iv.  25,  26.  The  story  is  known 
of  the  concurrence  of  Herod  and  Pilate  in  the  thing :  the 
one,  ruler  af  the  place  where  he  lived,  and  conversed  ;  the 
other,  of  the  place,  where  he  was  taken  and  crucified. 

2.  For  ecclesiastical  rulers;  what  was  done  by  the 
priests,  and  all  the  council  of  the  elders,  is  known.  The 
matter  of  fact  need  not  be  insisted  on ;  indeed,  they  were 
the  great  contrivers  and  malicious  plotters  of  his  death;  us- 
ing all  ways  and  means  for  the  accomplishing  of  it.  Acts  iii. 
17.  in  particular  Annas,  the  usurper  of  the  priesthood,  seems 
to  have  had  a  great  hand  in  the  business,  and  therefore  to 
him  was  he  first  carried. 

2.  For  those  under  authority :  besides  what  we  have  in 
the  story,  Peter  tells  the  body  of  the  people,  Acts  ii.  23. 
that  *  they  took  him,  and  with  wicked  hands  crucified  him, 
and  slew  him  :'  and,  chap.  iii.  15,  '  That  they  killed  the  prince 
of  life;'  so  Zech.  xii.  10.  not  only  the  house  of  David,  the 
rulers,  but  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  the  people,  are  said 
to  pierce  him,  and  thence,  'they  who  pierced  him,'  is  a  pe- 
riphrasis of  the  Jews ;  Rev,  i.  7.  after,  every  eye  shall  see 
him,  there  is  a  distribution  into  them  that  pierced  him,  that 
is,  the  Jews,  and  all  the  kindreds  of  the  earth,  that  is,  the 
Gentiles.  The  very  rabble  was  stirred  up  to  cry  '  Crucify  him, 
crucify  him,'  and  did  it  accordingly  ;  Matt,  xxvii.  20.  And 
they  all  consented  as  one  man  in  the  cry,  ver.  22.  and  that 
with  violence  and  clamour ;  ver.  23.  *  abjects  made  mouths 
at  him,'  Psal.  xxxv.  15.  xxii.  6. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  115 

3.  Distinguish  man  in  relation  to  himself,  either  upon  a 
natural  or  moral  account,  as  his  kindred  and  relations,  or 
strangers,  and  they  will  appear  to  be  all  engaged  ;  but  this 
is  so  comprised  in  the  former  distinction  of  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles, that  it  need  not  be  insisted  on. 

2.  On  a  moral  account,  as  they  were  either  his  friends 
or  his  enemies,  he  suffered  from  both. 

1.  His  friends,  all  his  disciples,  forsook  him,  and  fled; 
Matt.  xxvi.  56.  the  worst  of  them  betrayed  him,  ver.  14.  and 
the  best  of  them  denied  him,  ver.  10.  and  so  there  was  'none 
to  help,'  Psal.  xxii.  11. 

And  if  it  were  thus  with  him  in  the  house  of  his  friends, 
what  may  be  expected  from 

2.  His  enemies  ;  their  malice  and  conspiracy,  their  im- 
placableness  and  cruelty,  their  plotting  and  accomplishment 
of  their  designs,  take  up  so  great  a  part  of  the  history  of 
his  crucifying,  that  I  shall  not  need  insist  on  particular  in- 
stances. 

Yea,  mankind  was  engaged,  as  distinguished  into  sexes. 
Of  men  of  all  sorts  you  have  heard  already ;  and  the  tempt- 
ing, ensnaring,  captious  question  of  the  maid  to  Peter  mani- 
fests, that  amongst  his  persecutors,  there  were  of  that  sex 
also.  Matt.  xxvi.  69. 

Of  men's  distinction  by  their  employments,  of  soldiers, 
lawyers,  citizens,  divines,  all  concurring  to  this  work  ;  I  shall 
not  add  any  thing  to  what  hath  been  spoken. 

Thus  the  first  order  of  creatures,  those  that  are  intellec- 
tual, were  universally,  at  least  with  a  distributive  univer- 
sality, engaged  in  the  suffering  of  the  Lord  Jesus;  and  the 
reason  of  this  general  engagement  was,  because  the  curse, 
that  was  come  upon  them  for  sin,  had  filled  them  all  with 
enmity  one  against  another.  1.  Fallen  man  and  angels 
were  engaged  into  an  everlasting  enmity,  on  the  first  en- 
trance of  sin  ;  Gen.  iii.  15,  16.  2.  Men  one  towards  another 
were  filled  with  malice,  and  envy,  and  hatred ;  Tit.  iii.  3. 

3.  The  Jews  and  Gentiles  were  engaged  by  way  of  vi- 
sible representation  of  the  enmity  which  was  come  on  all 
mankind ;  John  iv.  9.  Eph.  ii.  15 — 17.  and  therefore  he  who 
was  to  undergo  the  whole  curse  of  the  law,  was  to  have  the 
rage  and  fury  of  them  all  executed  on  him.  As  I  said  be- 
fore, all  their  persecution  of  him  concerned  not  his  death. 


116  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

as  it  was  a  sacrifice,  as  he  made  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin ; 
but  as  it  was  a  punishment,  the  utmost  of  their  enmity  was 
to  be  executed  towards  him. 

2.  The  residue  of  the  creatures  concurred  thus  far  to  his 
sufferings,  as  to  manifest  themselves  at  that  time,  to  be  vi- 
sibly under  the  curse  and  indignation  that  was  upon  him, 
and  so  withdrew  themselves,  as  it  were,  from  yielding  him 
the  least  assistance.  To  instance  in  general,  heaven  and 
earth  lost  their  glory,  and  that  in  them  which  is  useful  and 
comfortable  to  the  children  of  men,  without  which  all  the 
other  conveniences  and  advantages  are  as  a  thing  of  nought: 
'the  glory  of  heaven  is  its  light;'  Psal.  xix.1,2.  Andtheglory 
of  the  earth,  is  its  stability  :  he  hath  fixed  the  earth,  that  it 
shall  not  be  moved. 

Now  both  these  were  lost  at  once.  The  heavens  were 
darkened,  when  it  might  be  expected,  in  an  ordinary  course, 
that  the  sun  should  have  shone  in  its  full  beauty.  Matt,  xxvii. 
45.  Luke  xxiii.  44,  45.  And  the  earth  lost  its  stability,  and 
shook  or  trembled,  ver.  51.  and  the  rocks  rent,  and  the 
graves  opened  ;  all  evidences  of  that  displeasure  against  sin, 
which  God  was  then  putting  in  execution  to  the  utmost ; 
Rom.  i.  18. 

Thus  first  in  his  suffering  there  was  universality  of  effici- 
ent causes. 

2.  There  was  a  universality  in  respect  of  the  subject 
wherein  he  suffered.  He  suffered,  1.  In  his  person, 
2.  In  his  name  ;  3.  In  his  friends ;  4.  In  his  goods  ;  as  the 
curse  of  the  law  extended  to  all,  and  that  universally  in  all 
these. 

1.  In  his  person,  or  his  human  nature  in  his  person;  he 
suffered  in  the  two  essential  constituent  parts  of  it ;  his 
body,  and  his  soul. 

1.  His  body.  In  general  as  to  its  integral  parts;  his 
body  was  broken,  1  Cot.  xi.  24.  and  crucified  ;  his  blood 
was  shed,  or  poured  out. 

2.  His  soul.  His  soul  was  made  an  offering  for  sin;  Isa. 
liii.  10.  And  his  soul  '  was  heavy  unto  death  ;'  Matt.  xxvi. 
37,  38. 

!  2.  In  particular :  his  body  suffered  in  all  its   concern- 

\  ments,  namely,  all  his  senses,  and  all  its  parts  or  members. 

\  1.  In  all  its  senses  :  as  to  instance, 

\ 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  117 

1.  In  his  feeling  ;  he  was  full  of  pain,  which  made  him, 
as  he  says,  cry  for  disquietness ;  and  this  is  comprised  in 
every  one  of  those  expressions  which  say  he  was  broken, 
pierced,  and  lived  so  long  on  the  cross,  in  the  midst  of  most 
exquisite  torture  ;  until  being  full  of  pain,  he  cried  out,  and 
gave  up  the  Ghost;  Matt,  xxvii.  50. 

2.  His  tasting.  When  he  fainted  with  loss  of  blood,  and 
grew  thirsty,  they  gave  him  'gall  and  vinegar  to  drink,' 
Matt,  xxvii.  34.  John  xix.  29.  Matt,  xxvii.  48.  not  to  stu- 
pify  his  senses,  but  to  increase  his  torment. 

3.  His  seeing.  Though  not  so  much  in  the  natural  organ 
of  it,  as  in  its  use.  He  saw  his  mother  and  disciples  stand- 
ing by,  full  of  grief,  sorrov/,  and  confusion,  which  exceed- 
ingly increased  his  anguish  and  perplexity ;  John  xix.  25, 
26.  And  he  saw  his  enemies  full  of  rage  and  horror,  standing- 
round  about  him;  Psal.  xxii.  He  saw  them  passing  by,  and 
wagging  the  head  in  scorn.  Matt.  xxix.  39.    Psal.  xxii.  7,  8. 

4.  His  ears  were  filled  with  the  reproach  and  blasphemy, 
of  which  he  grievously  complains  ;  Psal.  xxii.  7,  8.  which 
also  is  expressed  in  his  accomplishment.  Matt,  xxvii.  39 — 44. 
Luke  xxiii.  36 — 38.  They  reproached  him  with  God,  and  his 
ministry,  and  his  profession  ;  as  did  also  one  of  the  thieves 
that  was  crucified  with  him.    And, 

5.  They  crucified  him  in  a  noisome  place,  a  place  of 
stink  and  loathsomeness  ;  a  place  where  they  cast  the  dead 
bodies  of  men,  from  whose  bones  it  got  the  name  of  Gol- 
gotha, a  place  of  dead  men's  sculls  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  33. 

2.  He  suffered  in  all  the  parts  of  his  body  ;  especially 
those,  which  are  most  tender  and  full  of  sense. 

1.  For  his  head,  they  planted  a  crown  of  thorns,  and  put 
it  on  him  ;  and  to  increase  his  pain,  smote  it  on  (that  the 
thorns  might  pierce  him  the  deeper)  with  their  staves ;  Matt, 
xxvii.  28,  29.  as  the  Jews  had  stricken  him  before,  chap.  xxvi. 
68.  John  xix.  2,  3. 

2.  His  face  they  spit  upon,  buffeted,  stroke,  and  plucked 
oflf  his  hair  ;  Isa.  1.  6.  Matt.  xxvi.  67,  68. 

3.  His  back  was  torn  with  whips  and  scourges.  Matt, 
xxvii.  27.  John  xix.  1.  l/xaariyoxTs ;  there  they  made  long 
their  furrows. 

4.  His  hands,  and  feet,  and  side,  were  pierced  with  nails 
and  spears  ;  Psal.  xxii.  16. 

5.  To  express  the  residue  of  his  body,  and  the  condition 


118  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

of  it,  when  he  hung  on  the  cross  so  long  by  the  soreness  of 
his  hands  and  his  feet,  says  he,  *  All  my  bones  are  out  of 
joint;'  Psal.  xxii.  17.  and  also  ver.  14,  15. 

Thus  was  it  with  his  body;  the  like  also  is  expressed  of 
his  soul,  for, 

1.  On  his  mind  was  darkness  ;  not  in  it,  but  on  it,  as  to 
his  apprehension  of  the  love  and  presence  of  God.  Hence 
was  his  cry,  Psal.  xxii.  1,  '  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast 
thou  forsaken  me?'  Matt,  xxvii.  46.  Though  his  faith  was 
upon  the  whole  of  the  matter  prevalent  and  victorious  ;  Isa. 
1.  8,  9.  yet  he  had  many  sore  conflicts  with  the  sense  and 
appi'ehension  of  God's  wrath  for  sin,  and  that  desertion  he 
was  then  under,  as  to  any  cheering  influences  of  his  love  and 
presence. 

For  the  rest  of  his  faculties,  he  was  not  only  under  the 
pressure  of  the  most  perplexing,  grievous,  and  burdensome 
passions,  that  human  nature  is  obnoxious  unto,  as,  1.  Hea- 
viness ;  *  His  soul  was  heavy  unto  death  ;'  Matt.  xxvi.  37. 

2.  Grief;  no  '  sorrow  like  to  his  ;'  Lamen.  i.  12. 

3.  Fear;  Heb.  v.  7.  but  also  was  pressed  into  a  condi- 
tion, beyond  what  we  have  words  to  express,  or  names  of 
passions  or  affections  to  set  it  forth  by.  Hence  he  is  said 
to  be  in  an  agony  ;  Luke  xxii.  44.  to  be  amazed ;  Mark  xiv. 
33.  with  the  like  expressions,  intimating  a  condition  mise- 
rable and  distressed  beyond  what  we  are  able  to  comprehend 
or  express. 

2.  In  his  name,  his  repute,  or  credit,  he  suffered  also. 
He  was  numbered  amongst  transgressors;  Isa. liii.  11.  Psal. 
xxii.  counted  a  malefactor,  and  crucified  amongst  them  ;  a 
seducer,  a  blasphemer,  a  seditious  person,  a  false  prophet, 
and  was  cruelly  mocked  and  derided  on  the  cross  as  an 
impostor,  that  saved  others,  but  could  not  save  himself;  that 
pretended  to  be  the  Messias,  the  King  of  Israel,  but  could 
not  come  down  from  the  cross  ;  laid  in  the  balance  with 
Barrabas,  a  rogue  and  a  murderer,  and  rejected  for  him. 

3.  In  his  friends.  The  *  shepherd  was  smitten,  and  the 
sheep  scattered  ;'  Zech.  xiii.  7.  All  his  friends  distressed, 
scattered,  glad  to  fly  for  their  lives,  or  to  save  themselves  by 
doing  the  things  that  were  worse  than  death. 

4.  In  his  goods,  even  all  that  he  had ;  '  they  parted  his 
garments,  and  cast  lots  for  his  vesture ;'  Psal.  xxii.  18.  Thus 
did  he  not  in  any  thing  go  free  ;  that  the  curse  of  the  law  in 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  119 

all  things  might  be  executed  on  him ;  the  law  curses  a  man 
in  all  his  concernments  ;  with  the  immission  and  infliction 
of  every  thing  that  is  evil,  and  the  subtraction  of  every  thing 
that  is  good  ;  that  is,  with'  psena  sensus,  et  psena  damni,'  as 
they  are  called. 

In  reference  to  the  law,  I  say,  that  Christ  underwent  that 
very  punishment  that  was  threatened  in  the  law,  and  was 
due  to  sinners.  The  same  that  we  should  have  undergone, 
had  not  our  surety  done  it  for  us  ;  to  clear  this  briefly  ob- 
serve, 

1.  That  the  punishment  of  the  law  may  be  considered 
two  ways. 

1.  Absolutely  in  its  own  nature,  as  it  lies  in  the  law,  and 
the  threatening  thereof.  This  in  general  is  called  death  ; 
Gen.  iii.  15.  Ezek.  xv.  4.  Rom.  v.  12.  And  by  way  of  ag- 
gravation, because  of  its  comprising  the  death  of  body  and 
soul,  *  death  unto  death;'  2  Cor.  ii.  16.  and  the  second  death; 
Rev.  XX.  14.  and  the  curse;  Deut.  xxvii.  29.  and  Matt.  xxv.  41. 
and  wrath,  &c.  Hence  we  are  said  to  be  delivered  from  wrath 
to  come;  1  Thess.  i.  10.  Rom.  ii.  5.  wrath,  or  the  day  of 
wrath,  and  in  innumerable  other  places ;  all  which  are  set 
out  in  many  metaphorical  expressions  by  those  things  which 
are  to  the  nature  of  man  most  dreadful ;  as  of  a  lake  with 
fire  and  brimstone  ;  of  Tophet,  whose  pile  is  much  wood, 
and  the  like. 

Of  this  punishment  in  general  there  are  two  parts. 

1.  Loss,  or  separation  from  God,  expressed  in  these 
words,  '  Depart  from  me  ;'  Matt.  vii.  23.  'Go  ye  cursed ;' 
Matt.  xxv.  41.  as  also  2  Thess.  i.  9. 

2.  Sense  or  pain,  whence  it  is  called  fire ;  as  2  Thess.  i. 
9.  Torments,  &c.  All  this  we  say  Christ  underwent,  as  shall 
be  farther  manifested. 

2.  Punishment  of  the  law  may  be  considered  relatively 
to  its  subject,  or  the  person  punished,  and  that  in  two  re- 
gards. 

1.  In  reference  to  its  own  attendencies,  and  necessary 
consequents,  as  it  falls  upon  the  persons  to  be  punished ; 
and  these  are  two. 

1.  '  That  it  be  a  worm  that  dieth  not ;'  Matt.  ix.  44. 
Isa.  Ixvi.  24. 

2.  That  it  be  a  fire,  not  to  be  quenched ;  that  it  be  ever- 


120  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

lasting,  that  its  torments  be  eternal ;  and  both  these,  I  say, 
attend  and  follow  the  punishment  of  the  law,  on  the  account 
of  its  relation  to  the  persons  punished  ;  for, 

1.  The  worm  is  from  the  inbeing,  and  everlasting  abiding 
of  a  man's  own  sin  ;  that  tormenting  anguish  of  conscience, 
which  shall  perplex  the  damned  to  eternity,  attends  their 
punishment  merely  from  their  own  sin  inherent;  this  Christ 
could  not  undergo.  The  worm  attends  not  sin  imputed,  but 
sin  inherent ;  especially  not  sin  imputed  to  him  who  under- 
went it  willingly.  It  being  the  cruciating  vexation  of  men's 
own  thoughts,  kindled  by  the  wrath  of  God  against  them- 
selves, about  their  own  sin. 

2.  That  this  worm  never  dies,  that  this  fire  can  never  be 
quenched,  but  abides  for  ever,  is  also  from  the  relation  of 
punishment  to  a  finite  creature  that  is  no  more.  Eternity 
is  not  absolutely  in  the  curse  of  the  law,  but  as  a  finite  crea- 
ture is  cursed  thereby.  If  a  sinner  could  at  once  admit  upon 
himself  that  which  is  equal  in  divine  justice  to  his  offence, 
and  so  make  satisfaction,  there  might  be  an  end  of  his  pu- 
nishment in  [time.  ^  But  a  finite,  and  every  way  limited 
creature,  having  sinned  his  eternity  in  this  world,  against  an 
eternal  and  infinite  God,  must  abide  by  it  for  ever.  This  was 
Christ  free  from ;  the  dignity  of  his  person  was  such,  as  that 
he  could  fully  satisfy  divine  justice,  in  a  limited  season; 
after  which,  God  in  justice  loosed  the  pains  of  death,  for  it 
was  impossible  he  should  be  detained  thereby.  Acts  ii.  24. 
and  that  because  he  was  able  to  swallow  up  death  into 
victory. 

2.  Punishment,  as  it  relates  to  the  persons  punished,  may 
be  also  considered  in  respect  of  the  effects  which  it  pro- 
duceth  in  them  which  are  not  in  the  punishment  absolutely 
considered,  and  these  are  generally  two. 

—  1.  Repining  against  God,  and  blaspheming  of  him  ;  as 
iftthat  type  of  hell ;  Isa.  viii.  20.  This  is  evil,  or  sin  in  it- 
self, which  punishment  is  not.  It  is  from  the  righteous  God, 
who  will  do  no  iniquity.  This  proceeds  from  men's  hatred 
of  God.  They  hate  him  in  this  world,  when  he  doth  them 
good,  and  blesses  them  with  many  mercies.;  how  much  more 
will  their  hatred  be  increased,  when  they  shall  be  cut  off  from 
all  favour  or  mercy  whatever,  and  never  enjoy  one  drop  of 
refreshment  from  him.     They  hate  him,  his  justice,  yea,  his 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  121 

blessedness,  and  all  his  perfections.  Hence  they  murmur, 
repine,  and  blaspheme  him.  Now  this  must  needs  be  infi- 
nitely remote  from  him,  who  in  love  to  his  Father,  and  his 
Father's  glory,  underwent  this  punishment.  He  was  loved 
of  the  Father,  and  loved  him,  and  willingly  drank  of  this  cup, 
which  poisons  the  souls  of  sinners  with  wrath  and  revenge. 

2.  Despair  in  themselves  ;  their  hopes  being  cut  oft'  to 
eternity,  there  remaining  no  more  sacrifice  for  sin,  they  are 
their  own  tormentors  with  everlastingly  perplexing  despair. 
But  this  our  Saviour  was  most  remote  from ;  and  that  because 
he  believed  he  should  have  a  glorious  issue  of  the  trial  he 
underwent;  Heb.  xii.  2.  Isa.  1.  8. 

But  as  to  the  punishment  that  is  threatened  in  the  law, 
in  itself  considered,  Christ  underwent  the  same  that  the  law 
threatened,  and  which  we  should  have  undergone.     For, 

1.  The  law  threatened  death  ;  Gen.  iii.  15.  Ezek.  xviii. 
4.  and  he  tasted  death  for  us ;  Heb.  ii.  9.  Psal.  xxii.  7,  8. 
The  punishment  of  the  law  is  the  curse  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  29. 
and  he  was  made  a  curse  ;  Gal.  iii.  13.  The  law  threatened 
loss  of  the  love  and  the  favour  of  God,  and  he  lost  it;  Psal. 
xxii.  1. 

To  say  that  the  death  threatened  by  the  law  was  one,  and 
that  Christ  underwent  another,  that  eternal,  this  temporal, 
and  so  also  of  the  curse,  and  desertion  threatened  (besides 
what  shall  be  said  afterward)  would  render  the  whole  busi- 
ness of  our  salvation  unintelligible,  as  being  revealed  in 
terms  equivocal,  no  where  explained. 

2.  There  is  not  the  least  intimation  in  the  whole  book  of 
God,  of  any  change  of  the  punishment,  in  reference  to  the 
surety  from  what  it  was,  or  should  have  been,  in  respect  of 
the  sinner.  God  made  all  '  our  iniquities  to  meet  on  him  ;' 
that  is  (as  hath  been  declared),  the  punishment  due  to  them. 
Was  it  the  same  punishment  or  another?  Did  we  deserve 
one  punishment,  and  Christ  undergo  another?  Was  it  the 
sentence  of  the  law,  that  was  executed  on  him,  or  was  it 
some  other  thing,  that  he  was  obnoxious  to  ?  It  is  said,  that 
he  was  'made  under  the  law ;'  Gal.  iv.  4.  that  sin  was  'con- 
demned in  his  flesh ;'  Rom.  viii.  3.  that '  God  spared  him  not;' 
Rom.  viii.  31.  that  he  'tasted  death;'  that  he  was  *made  a 
.curse ;'  all  relating  to  the  law  :  that  he  suffered  more  or  less 
there  is  no  mention. 

VOL.  IX.  K 


122  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

It  is  strange  to  me,  that  we  should  deserve  one  punish- 
ment, and  he  who  is  punished  for  us,  undergo  another;  yet 
both  of  them  be  constantly  described  by  the  same  names 
and  titles.  If  God  laid  the  punishment  of  our  sins  on  Christ, 
certainly  it  was  the  punishment  that  was  due  to  them  ;  men- 
tion is  every  where  made  of  a  commutation  of  persons,  the 
just  suffering  for  the  unjust,  the  sponsor  for  the  offender, 
his  name  as  a  surety  being  taken  into  the  obligation,  and 
the  whole  debt  required  of  him  ;  but  of  a  change  of  punish- 
ment, there  is  no  mention  at  all.  And  there  is  this  despe- 
rate consequence  that  will  be  made  readily,  upon  a  supposal 
that  any  less  than  the  curse  of  the  law  and  death,  in  the  na- 
ture of  it  eternal,  was  inflicted  on  Christ,  namely,  that  God 
indeed  is  not  such  a  sore  revenger  of  sin,  as  in  the  Scrip- 
ture he  is  proposed  to  be ;  but  can  pass  it  by  in  the  way  of 
compositions  on  much  easier  terms. 

3.  The  punishment  due  to  us,  that  is  in  the  'curse  of  the 
law/  consists,  as  was  said,  of  two  parts. 

1.  Loss,  or  separation  from  God. 

2.  Sense,  from  the  infliction  of  the  evil  threatened;  and 
both  these  did  our  Saviour  undergo. 

For  the  first,  it  is  expressed  of  him,  Psal.  xxii,  1.  and  he 
actually  complains  of  it  himself,  Matt,  xxvii.  46.  and  of  this 
cry  for  a  while,  he  says,  'O  my  God,  I  cry  in  the  day-time 
and  thou  hearest  not;'  Psal.  xxii.  2.  until  he  gives  out  that 
grievous  complaint,  ver.  15.  'My  strength  is  dried  up  like  a 
potsherd ;'  which  cry  he  pressed  so  long  with  strong  cries 
and  supplications,  until  he  was  'heard  and  delivered  from 
what  he  feared  ;'  Heb.  v.  7.  They  who  would  invent  eva- 
sions for  this  express  complaint  of  our  Saviour,  that  he  was 
deserted  and  forsaken,  as  that  he  spake  it  in  reference  to  his 
church,  or  of  his  own,  being  left  to  the  power  and  malice  of 
the  Jews,  do  indeed  little  less  than  blaspheme  him ;  and  say 
he  was  not  forsaken  of  God,  when  himself  complains  that 
he  was.  Forsaken,  I  say,  not  by  the  disjunction  of  his  per- 
sonal union;  but  as  to  the  communication  of  effects  of  love 
and  favour,  which  is  the  desertion  that  the  damned  lie  under 
in  hell.  And  for  his  being  forsaken,  or  given  up  to  the 
hands  of  men,  was  that  it  which  he  complained  of?  Was 
that  it  whereof  he  was  afraid  ?  Which  he  was  troubled  at  ? 
Which  he  sweat  blood  under  the  consideration  of?  and  had 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION'    OF    CHRIST.  123 

need  of  an  angel  to  comfort  and  support  him  ?  Was  he  so 
much  in  courage  and  resolution  Kelow  those  many  thousands 
who  joyfully  suffered  the  same  things  for  him?  If  he  was 
only  forsaken  to  the  power  of  the  Jews  ;  it  must  be  so.  Let 
men  take  heed  how  they  give  occasion  of  blaspheming  the 
holy  and  blessed  name  of  the  Son  of  God. 

''Vaninus,  that  grand  Atheist,  who  was  burned  for  atheism 
at  Tholouse  in  France,  all  the  way  as  he  went  to  the  stake 
did  nothing  but  insult  over  the  friars  that  attended  him  ; 
telling  them,  that  their  Saviour  when  he  was  led  to  death 
did  sweat  and  tremble,  and  was  in  an  agony.  But  he  upon 
the  account  of  reason,  whereunto  he  sacrificed  his  life,  went 
with  boldness  and  cheerfulness.  God  visibly  confuted  his 
blasphemy,  and  at  the  stake  he  not  only  trembled  and 
quaked,  but  roared  with  horror.  But  let  men  take  heed 
how  they  justify  the  atheistical  thoughts  of  men,  in  asserting 
our  blessed  Redeemer  to  have  been  cast  into  that  miserable 
and  deplorable  condition,  merely  with  the  consideration  of  a 
temporary  death,  which  perhaps  the  thieves  that  were  cruci- 
fied with  him  did  not  so  much  tremble  at. 

2.  For  *  paena  sensus  :'  from  what  hath  been  spoken  it  is 
sufficiently  manifest  what  he  underwent  on  this  account. 
To  what  hath  been  delivered  before,  of  his  being  *  bruised, 
afliicted,  broken'  of  God  from  Isa.  liii.  although  he  was 
taken  from '  prison,  and  judgment,'  or  everlasting  condemna- 
tion ;  ver.  8.  add  but  this  one  consideration  of  what  is  af- 
firmed of  him,  that  he  *  tasted  death  for  us/  Heb.  ii.  9.  and 
this  will  be  cleared.  What  death  was  it  he  tasted  ?  The 
death  that  had  the  curse  attending  it;  Gal.  iii.  13.  '  He  was 
made  a  curse ;'  and  what  death  that  was  himself  declares, 

b  Vidi  ego  dum  plaustro  per  ora  vulgi  traducitur,  illudentem  Theologo  e  Francis- 
canis,  cujus  cura  mollire  ferocitatem  animi  obstinati.  Lucilius  ferocitate  contumax, 
dum  in  patibulum  traditus,  monachi  solatium  aspernatus  objectam  crucera  ayersatur, 
Christoque  illudit  in  liaec  eadera  verba;  illi  in  extremis  prae  timore  inibellis  sudor, 
e<T0  imperterritus  morior.  Falso  sane  imperterritum  se  dixit  sceletus  homo,  quern 
vi°diraus  dejectum  animo,  philosophia  uti  pessirae,  cujus  se  mentiebatur  professoreni. 
Erat  illi  in  extremis  aspectus  ferox  et  horridus,  inquieta  mens,  anxium  quodcunque 
loquebatur :  et  quanquam  philosophice  mori  se  clamabat  identidem,  finiisse  ut  brutum 
nemo negaverit.  Antequara  rogo  subderetur  ignis:  jussus  sacrilegam  linguamcultro 
submittere,  negat,  neque  exerit,  nisi  forcipum  vi  apprehensam  carnifex  ferro  abscin- 
dit:  nou  alias  vociferatio  horridior:  diceres  raugire  ictura  bovem,  &c.  Hie  Lucilii 
Vauini  finis,  cui  quanta  constantia  fuerit,  probat  belluinus  in  morte  clamor.  Vidi  ego 
in  custodia,  vidi  in  patibulo,  videram  antcquam  subiret  vincula:  flagitiosus  in  liber- 
tate,  et  voluptatura  sectator  avidus,  in  carcere  Catholicus,  in  extremis  omni  pbiloso- 
phiae  prsssidio  destitutus,  amens  moritur.  Gramon.  Histor.  Gal.  lib.  3.  ad  An.  1619. 

K    2 


124  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

Matt.  XXV.  41.  where,  calling  men  accursed,  he  cries  'go  into 
everlasting  fire  :'  you  that  are  obnoxious  to  the  law,  go  to 
the  punishment  of  hell ;  yea,  and  that  curse  which  he  un- 
derwent, Gal.iii.  13.  is  opposed  to  the  blessing  of  Abraham, 
ver.  14,  or  the  blessing  promised  him,  which  was  doubtless 
life  eternal. 

And  to  make  it  yet  more  clear,  it  was  by  death,  that  he 
delivered  us  from  death  ;  Heb.  ii.  14,  15.  and  if  he  died  only 
a  temporal  death,  he  delivered  us  only  from  temporal  death, 
as  a  punishment.  But  he  shews  us  what  death  he  delivered 
us  from,  and  consequently  what  death  he  underwent  for  us, 
John  viii.  51.  *He  shall  never  see  death;  that  is,  eternal 
death,  for  every  believer  shall  see  death  temporal. 

On  these  considerations  it  is  evident,  that  the  sufferings 
of  Christ  in  relation  to  the  law,  were  the  very  same  that  were 
threatened  to  sinners,  and  which  we  should  have  undergone, 
had  not  our  surety  undertaken  the  work  for  us.  Neither  was 
there  any  difference  in  reference  to  God  the  judge,  and  the 
sentence  of  the  law,  but  only  this,  that  the  same  person  who 
offended,  did  not  suffer:  and  that  thqse  consequences  of  the 
punishment  inflicted,  which  attend  the  offenders'  own  suf- 
fering, could  have  no  place  in  him ;  but  this  being  not  the 
main  of  my  present  design,  I  shall  no  farther  insist  on  it. 

Only  I  marvel,  that  any  should  think  to  implead  this 
truth  of  Christ's  suffering  the  same  that  we  did,  by  saying 
that  Christ's  obligation  to  punishment  was  'sponsionis  pro- 
prise,'  ours  'violatae  legis.'  As  though  it  were  the  manner 
how  Christ  came  to  be  obnoxious  to  punishment,  and  not 
what  punishment  he  underwent,  that  is  asserted  when  we  say, 
that  he  underwent  the  same  that  we  should  have  done.  But 
as  to  say,  that  Christ  became  obnoxious  to  punishment  the 
same  way  that  we  do,  or  did,  that  is,  by  sin  of  his  own,  is 
blasphemy  :  so  to  say  he  did  not  upon  his  own  voluntary 
undertaking  undergo  the  same,  is  little  less.  It  is  true, 
Christ  was  made  sin  for  us,  had  our  sin  imputed  to  him,  not 
his  own ;  was  obliged  to  answer  for  our  fault,  not  his  own ; 
but  he  was  obliged  to  answer  what  we  should  have  done  : 
but  hereof  elsewhere. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  125 


CHAP.  XXVII. 

Of  the  covenant  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  the  (jround  and  foundation 
of  this  dispensation  of  Christ's  heing  punished  for  us,  and  in  our  stead. 

The  fourth  thing  considerable,  is  the  ground  of  this  dis- 
pensation of  Christ's  being  punished  for  us,  which  also  hath 
influence  into  his  whole  mediation  on  our  behalf.  This  is 
that  compact,  covenant,  convention,  and  agreement,  that  was 
between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  work  of  our  redemption  by  the  mediation  of  Christ,  to 
the  praise  of  the  glorious  grace  of  God. 

The  will  of  the  Father,  appointing  and  designing  the 
Son  to  be  the  head,  husband,  deliverer,  and  redeemer  of  his 
elect,  his  church,  his  people,  whom  he  did  foreknow,  with 
the  will  of  the  Son  voluntarily,  freely  undertaking  that 
work,  and  all  that  was  required  thereunto,  is  that  compact 
(for  in  that  form  it  is  proposed  in  the  Scripture),  that  we 
treat  of. 

It  being  so  proposed,  so  we  call  it ;  though  there  be  diffi- 
culty in  its  explication.  Rabbi  Ruben,  in  Galatinus,  says  of 
Isa.  Ixvi.  15.  that  if  the  Scripture  had  not  said  it,  it  had  not 
been  lawful  to  have  said  it,  but  being  written,  it  may  be 
spoken,  "in  fire,  or  by  fire  is  the  Lord  judged  ;'  for  it  is  not 
Sophet,  that  is,  'judging,'  but  Misphet,  that  is,  '  is  judged  :' 
which  by  some  is  applied  to  Christ,  and  the  fire  he  under- 
went in  his  suffering.  However  the  rule  is  safe,  that  which 
is  written  may  be  spoken  ;  for,  for  that  end  was  it  written  : 
God  in  his  word  teaching  us  how  we  should  speak  of  him  ; 
so  it  is  in  this  matter. 

It  is  true,  the  will  of  God  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  is  but  one.  It  is  a  natural  property,  and  where  there 
is  but  one  nature,  there  is  but  one  will :  but  in  respect  of 
their  distinct  personal  actings,  this  will  is  appropriated  to 
them  respectively ;  so  that  the  will  of  the  Father,  and  the 
will  of  the  Son,  may  be  considered  in  this  business.  Which 
though  essentially  one  and  the  same,  yet  in  their  distinct 
personality  it  is  distinctly  considered,  as  the  will  of  the  Fa- 
*  isaif:  nin"  rrxa  '3 


126  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF     CHRIST. 

ther,  and  the  will  of  the  Son ;  notwithstanding  the  unity  of 
essence,  that  is  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  yet  is  the 
work  distinctly  carried  on  by  them,  so  that  the  same  God 
judges  and  becomes  surety,  satisfieth  and  is  satisfied,  in 
these  distinct  persons. 

Thus  though  this  covenant  be  eternal,  and  the  object  of 
it  be  that  which  might  not  have  been,  and  so  it  hath  the  na- 
ture of  the  residue  of  God's  decrees  in  those  regards  ;  yet, 
because  of  this  distinct  acting  of  the  will  of  the  Father,  and 
the  will  of  the  Son,  with  regard  to  each  other,  it  is  more 
than  a  decree,  and  hath  the  proper  nature  of  a  covenant,  or 
compact.  Hence  from  the  moment  of  it,  I  speak  not  of 
time,  there  is  a  new  habitude  of  will  in  the  Father  and  Son 
towards  each  other,  that  is  not  in  them  essentially ;  I  call  it 
new,  as  being  in  God  freely,  not  naturally.  And  hence  was 
the  salvation  of  men  before  the  incarnation,  by  the  under- 
taking, mediation,  and  death  of  Christ.  That  the  saints 
under  the  Old  Testament  were  saved  by  Christ,  at  present 
I  take  for  granted.  That  they  were  saved  by  virtue  of  a 
mere  decree,  will  not  be  said.  From  hence  was  Christ  es- 
teemed to  be  incarnate,  and  to  have  suffered ;  or  the  fruits 
of  his  incarnation  and  suffering  could  not  have  been  im- 
puted to  any :  for  the  thing  itself  being  denied,  the  effects  of 
it  are  not. 

The  revelation  of  this  covenant  is  in  the  Scripture,  not 
that  it  was  then  constituted,  when  it  is  first  mentioned  in 
the  promises  and  prophecies  of  Christ,  but  then  first  declared 
or  revealed.  Christ  was  declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  by 
the  resurrection  from  the  dead ;  but  he  was  so  from  eternity. 
As  in  other  places  as  shall  be  evinced,  so  in  Isa.  liii.  is  this 
covenant  mentioned  ;  in  which  chapter  there  is  this  pro- 
phetical scheme ;  the  covenant  between  Father  and  Son, 
which  was  past,  is  spoken  of  as  to  come ;  and  the  sufferings 
of  Christ,  which  were  to  come,  are  spoken  of  as  past,  as  ap- 
pears to  every  one  that  but  reads  the  chapter.  It  is  also 
signally  ascribed  to  Christ's  coming  into  the  world:  not 
constitutively,  but  declaratively.  It  is  the  greatest  folly 
about  such  things  as  these,  to  suppose  them  then  done, 
when  revealed,  though  revealed  in  expressions  of  doing 
them.  These  things  being  premised,  i  proceed  to  manifest 
how  this  covenant  is  in  the  Scripture  declared. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  127 

Now  this  convention  or  agreement,  as  elsewhere,  so  it  is 
most  clearly  expressed,  Heb.  x.  from  Psal.  xl.  '  Lo,  I  come 
to  do  thy  will  O  God.'  And  what  will?  ver.  10.  'The  will 
by  which  we  are  sanctified,  through  the  offering  of  the  body 
of  Jesus  once  for  all.'  The  will  of  God  was,  that  Jesus 
should  be  offered ;  and  to  this  end,  that  we  might  be  sancti- 
fied and  saved  :  it  is  called  the  *  offering  of  the  body  of  Je- 
sus,' in  answer  to  what  was  said  before,  '  a  body  hast  thou 
prepared  me ;'  or  a  human  nature,  by  a  synecdoche.  My 
will,  says  God  the  Father,  is,  that  thou  have  a  body,  and 
that  that  body  be  offered  up,  and  that  to  this  end,  that  the 
children,  the  elect  might  be  sanctified :  says  the  Son  to 
this,  '  Lo,  I  am  come  to  do  thy  will.'  I  accept  of  the  con- 
dition, and  give  up  myself  to  the  performance  of  thy  will. 

To  make  this  more  distinctly  evident,  the  nature  of  such 
a  compact,  agreement,  or  convention,  as  depends  on  personal 
service,  such  as  this,  may  be  a  little  considered. 

There  are  five  things  required  to  the  complete  establish- 
ing and  accomplishing  of  such  a  compact  and  agreement : 
1.  That  there  be  sundry  persons,  two  at  least,  namely,  a  pro- 
miser  and  undertaker,  agreeing''  voluntarily  together  in  coun- 
sel and  design,  for  the  accomplishment,  and  bringing  about 
some  common  end,  acceptable  to  them  both,  so  agreeing  to- 
gether ;  being  both  to  do  somewhat,  that  they  are  not  other- 
wise obliged  to  do,  there  must  be  some  common  end  agreed 
on  by  them,  wherein  they  are  delighted;  and  if  they  do  not 
both  voluntarily  agree  to  what  is  on  each  hand  incumbent 
to  do,  it  is  no  covenant  or  compact,  but  an  imposition  of  one 
upon  the  other. 

2.  That  the  person  promising,  who  is  the  principal  en- 
gager in  the  covenant,  do  require  something  at  the  hand  of 
the  other,  to  be  done  or  undergone,  wherein  he  is  concerned. 
He  is  to  prescribe  something  to  him,  which  is  the  condition, 
whereon  the  accomplishment  of  the  end  aimed  at,  is  to  depend. 

3.  That  he  make  to  him  who  doth  undertake  such  pro- 
mises as  are  necessary  for  his  supportment  and  encourage- 
ment, and  which  may  fully  balance  in  his  judgment  and 
esteem,  all  that  is  required  of  him,  or  prescribed  to  him. 

4.  That  upon  the  weighing,  and  consideration  of  the 

b  Nee  dari  quicquam  necesse  est,  ut  substantiara  capiat  obligatio;  scd  sufficit  eos 
qui  negotia  gerunt  consentire.  Institut.  1. 3,  de  oblig.  ex  consensu. 


128  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

condition  and  promise,  the  duty  and  reward  prescribed  and 
engaged  for,  as  formerly  mentioned,  the  undertaker  do  vo- 
luntarily address  himself  to  the  one,  and  expect  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  other. 

5.  That  the  accomplishment  of  the  condition,  being^ 
pleaded  by  the  undertaker,  and  approved  by  the  promiser, 
the  common  end  originally  designed,  be  brought  about  and 
established. 

These  five  things  are  required,  to  the  entering  into,  and 
complete  accomplishment  of  such  a  covenant,  convention, 
or  agreement,  as  is  built  on  personal  performances ;  and 
they  are  all  eminently  expressed  in  the  Scripture,  to  be  found 
in  the  compact  between  the  Father  and  the  Son,  whereof  we 
speak,  as  upon  the  consideration  of  the  severalswill  appear. 

On  the  account  of  these  things,  found  at  least  virtually 
and  effectually,  in  this  agreement  of  the  Father  and  Son,  we 
call  it  a  covenant ;  not  with  respect  to  the  Latin  word  *  fas- 
dus,'  and  the  precise  use  of  it,  but  to  the  Hebrew  nn3,  and 
the  Greek  SmSr/jicr;,  whose  signification  and  use  alone  is  to  be 
attended  to,  in  the  business  of  any  covenant  of  God  ;  and  in 
what  a  large  sense  they  are  used,  is  known  to  all  that  under- 
stand them,  and  have  made  inquiry  into  their  import.  The 
rise  of  the  word  '  fcedus,'is  properly  paganish  and  supersti- 
tious ;  and  the  legal  use  of  it,  strict  to  a  mutual  engagement, 
upon  valuable  considerations  ;  the  form  of  its  entrance,  by 
the  sacrifice  and  killing  of  a  hog,  is  related  in  Polybius, 
Livius,  Virgil,  and  others.  The  general  words  used  in  it 
were;** '  Ita  fcede  me  percutiat  magnus  Jupiter,  utfoede  hunc 

<^  "OTTEp  iTTfoa-p^Ea-fljjv  (Toi,  i'X}ti  Wf oo-JiKTov ;  iX'^'  Formula  Jur.  institut.  lib.  3.  c. 
Tollitur.  §.  item  per.  Numerius  Nigidius  iiiterrogavit  Aulum  Augerium  :  Quicquid 
tibi  liodierno  die,  per  aquilianam  stipulationem  spopondi,  id  ne  orane  babes  accep- 
tum.  Respondit  Aulus  Aiigerius,  habeo,  acceptumque  tuli.  ibid. 

^  FaecialJs  sumpto  in  manibus  lapide,  postquam  de  foedere  inter  partes  convenerat, 
haec  verba  dixit.  Si  recte  ac  sine  dolomalo,  hoc  foedus  atque  hoc  jusjurandum  facio, 
dii  mibi  cuncta  felicia  praestent;  sin  aliter  aut  ago,  aut  cogito,  CEeteris  omnibus  salvis, 
in  propriis  legibus,  in  propriis  laribus,  in  propriis  templis,  in  propriis  sepulchris,  solus 
ego  pereara,  ut  hie  lapis  de  manibus  raeis  decidet.  Polyb.  lib.  3.  Audi  Jupiter,  audi 
pater  patrate,  ut  ilia  palam  prima  postrema,  ex  illis  tabulis  recitata  sunt  sine  dolo 
malo,  utque  ea  his  hodie  rectissime  intellecta  sunt;  illis  legibus  populus  Romanus 
prior  noil  deficiel;  si  prior  defecerit  publico  consilio,  dolo  malo,  tu  ille  diespiter,  po- 
pulum  Romanum  sic  ferito,  ut  ego  hunc  porcum  hodie  feriara;  tantoque  magis  ferito 
quanto  magis  potes,  pollesque  id  ubi  dixit,  porcum  saxo  silice  percussit.  Livius. 
Armati,  Jovis  ante  aras,  paterasque  tenentes 
Stabant :  et  cjesa  jungebant  fcedera  porca. — Virg.  JEn.  viii.  640. 

Ad  quern  locum  Servius  :  foedera  dicta  s\mt,  a  porca  fosde  ct  crudeliter  occisa  : 
nam  cum  ante  gladiis  configeretnr,  a  fecialibus  inventum,ut  silice  feriretur,  ea  causa 
quod  antiquum  Jovis  signum,  lapidis  silicera  putaveruiit  esse. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  129 

porcum  macto,  si  pactum  foederis  non  servavero,'  whence  is 
that  phrase  of  one  in  danger  ;  *  sto  inter  sacrum  et  saxum.' 
The  hog  being  killed  with  a  stone ;  so  'fcedus'  is  '  a  feriendo.' 
Though  sometimes  even  that  word  be  used  in  a  very 
large  sense,  for  any  orderly  disposed  government ;  as  in  the 
poet : 

Regemque  dedit,  qui  foedere  certo 

Et  preniere,  et  laxas  sciret  dare  jussus  habenas,  &c. — Virg.  ^n.  1.  62. 

But  unto  the  signification  and  laws  hereof,  in  this  business, 
we  are  not  bound  :  it  sufficeth  for  our  present  intendment, 
that  the  things  mentioned  be  found  virtually  in  this  com- 
pact, which  they  are. 

1.  There  are  the  Father  and  the  Son,  as  distinct  persons 
agreeing  together  in  counsel,  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  common  end  ;  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  salvation  of  the 
elect.  The  end  is  expressed,  Heb.  ii.  9,  10.  xii.  1.  Now 
thus  it  was,  Zech.  vi.  13.  and  the  '  counsel  of  peace  shall  be 
between  them  both,'  ^'  inter  ambos  ipsos.'  That  is  the  two 
persons  spoken  of,  not  the  two  offices  there  intimated,  that 
shall  meet  in  Christ ;  and  who  are  these  ?  The  Lord  Jehovah, 
who  speaks,  and  the  man  whose  name  is  nQlf  the  '  branch,' 
ver.  12.  who  is  to  '  do  all  the  great  things'  there  mentioned. 
*He  shall  grow  up,'  &c.  But  the  counsel  of  peace,  the  de« 
sign  of  our  peace,  is  between  them  both  ;  they  have  agreed 
and  consented  to  the  bringing  about  of  our  peace.  Hence 
is  that  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  Isa.  ix.  6.  '  Wonderful  Coun- 
sellor.' It  is  in  reference  to  the  business  there  spoken  of, 
that  he  is  so  called.  This  is  expressed  at  the  beginning  of 
the  verse ;  '  to  us  a  child  is  born,  to  us  a  Son  is  given ;'  to 
what  end  that  was  is  known ;  namely,  that  he  might  be  a 
Saviour  or  a  Redeemer ;  whence  he  is  afterward  called  the 
'  everlasting  Father,  the  Prince  of  peace  ;'  that  is,  a  Father 
to  his  church  and  people,  in  everlasting  mercy ;  the  grand 
Author  of  their  peace,  that  procured  it  for  them,  and  es 
tablished  it  unto  them.  Now  as  to  this  work,  that  he  who 
is  nnj  ^K  *  the  mighty  God,'  might  be  \r\i  p  *  a  Son  given,  a 
Child  born ;'  and  carry  on  a  work  of  mercy  and  peace  to- 
wards his  church,  is  he  called  the  wonderful  Counsellor,  as 
concurring  in  the  counsel  and  design  of  his  Father,  and  with 
him,  to  this  end  and  purpose.   Therefore,  when  he  comes  to 


J30  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

suffer  in  the  carrying  on  of  this  work,  God  calls  him  his  fel- 
low, Tl'Di^,  my  '  neighbour'  in  counsel  and  advise,  as  David 
describes*^ his  fellow  or  companion  ;  Psal.  Iv.  14.  '  We  took 
sweet  counsel  too^ether.'  He  was  the  fellow  of  the  Lord  of 
hosts,  on  this  account  that  they  took  counsel  together  about 
the  work  of  our  salvation  to  the  glory  of  God.  Prov.  viii. 
21  to  31.  makes  this  evident :  that  it  is  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  eternal  word,  and  wisdom  of  the  Father,  who  is  here  in- 
tended, was  before  evinced.  What  then  is  here  said  of  him? 
*  I  was  daily  the  delight  of  God,  rejoicing  before  him,  re- 
joicing in  the  habitable  parts  of  the  earth,  and  my  delight 
was  in  the  sons  of  men.'  When  was  this,  that  the  wisdom 
of  God  the  ]7ather  did  so  rejoice  before  him,  on  the  account 
of  the  sons  of  men,  ver.  24,  25.  '  When  there  was  no  depth, 
when  there  were  no  fountains  abounding  with  water,  before 
the  mountains  were  settled,'  &c.  *  whilst  as  yet  he  had  not 
made  the  earth,'  8ic.  But  how  could  this  be  ?  Namely,  by 
the  counsel  of  peace,  that  was  between  them  both,  which  is 
the  delight  of  the  soul  of  God,  and  wherein  both  Father 
and  Son  rejoice. 

The  first  thing  then  is  manifest ;  that  there  was  a  volun- 
tary concurrence,  and  distinct  consent  of  the  Father  and 
Son,  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  work  of  our  peace,  and 
bringing  us  to  God. 

2.  For  the  accomplishment  of  this  work,  the  Father  who 
is  principal  in  the  covenant,  the  promiser,  whose  love  *  sets 
all  on  work,'  as  is  frequently  expressed  in  the  Scripture,  re- 
quires of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  his  Son,  that  he  shall  do  that 
which  upon  consideration  of  his  justice,  glory,  and  honour, 
was  necessary  to  be  done,  for  the  bringing  about  the  end 
proposed ;  prescribing  to  him  a  law  for  the  performance 
thereof;  which  is  called  his  will  so  often  in  Scripture. 

What  it  was  that  was  required,  is  expressed  both  nega- 
tively and  positively. 

1.  Negatively,  that  he  should  not  do,  or  bring  about  this 
work,  by  any  of  those  sacrifices  that  had  been  appointed  to 
make  atonement '  suo  more,'  and  to  typify  out  what  was  by  him 
really  to  be  performed.  This  the  Lord  Jesus  professeth  at 
the  entrance  of  his  work  when  he  addresses  himself  to  the 
doing  of  that  which  was  indeed  required.     '  Sacrifice  and 

f  Zech.  xiii.  7, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  131 

burnt-ofFerings,  &c.  thou  wouldest  not  have.'  He  was  not  to 
offer  any  of  the  sacrifices  that  had  been  offered  before,  as  at 
large  hath  been  recounted  :  it  was  the  will  of  GoO  that  by 
them,  he,  and  what  he  was  to  do,  should  be  shadowed  out 
and  represented;  whereupon,  at  his  coming  to  his  work, 
they  were  all  to  be  abrogated.  Nor  was  he  to  bring  silver 
or  gold  for  our  redemption,  according  to  the  contrivance  of 
the  poor  convinced  sinner,  Mic.  vii.  6.  but  he  was  to  tender 
God  another  manner  of  price  ;  1  Pet.  i.  18. 

He  was  to  do  that  which  the  old  sacrifices  could  not  do, 
as  hath  been  declared.  'For  it  was  not  possible  that  the 
blood  of  bulls  and  goats  should  take  away  sins;'  Heb.  x.5. 
acpaipHv  ainapriag,  quod  supra  a^tTuv  et  ava(j)ip£iv  est  extin- 
guere  peccata,  sive  facere  ne  ultra  peccetur;  id  sanguis 
Christi  facit,  tumquiafidem  in  nobis  parit,  tum  quiaChristo 
jus  dat  nobis  auxilia  necessaria  impetrandi.'  Grot,  in  Loo. 
Falsely  and  injuriously  to  the  blood  of  Christ.  ^A(j}aipHv 
afiapriag,  is  no  where  in  the  Scripture,  to  cause  men  to  '  cease 
to  sin  ;'  it  never  respects  properly  what  is  to  come,  but  what 
is  past.  The  apostle  treats  not  of  sanctification,  but  of  jus- 
tification. The  taking  away  of  sins  he  insists  on,  is  such, 
as  that  the  sinner  should  no  more  be  troubled  in  conscience 
for  the  guilt  of  them :  ver.  2.  The  typical  taking  away  of 
sins  by  sacrifices,  was  by  making  atonement  with  God  prin- 
cipally, not  by  turning  men  from  sin,  which  yet  was  a  con- 
sequent of  them.  The  blood  of  Christ  takes  away  sin,  as  to 
their  guilt,  by  justification,  and  not  only  as  to  their  filthy 
sanctification.  This  purification  also  by  blood,  he  expounds 
in  his  annotations,  chap.  ix.  14.  'Sanguini  autem  purgatio 
ista  tribuitur,  quia  per  sanguinem,  id  est,  mortem  Christi, 
secuto  ejus  excitatione,  etevectione,  gignitur  in  nobis  fides,' 
Rom.  iii.  25.  *  quae  deinde  fides  corda  purgat.'  Acts  xv.  19. 
The  meaning  of  these  words  is  evident  to  all  that  have  their 
senses  exercised  in  these  things.  The  aversion  of  the  ex- 
piation of  our  sins,  by  the  way  of  satisfaction  and  atonement, 
is  that  which  is  aimed  at.  Now  because  the  annotator  saw, 
that  the  comparison  insisted  on  with  the  sacrifices  of  old, 
would  not  admit  of  this  gloss.  He  adds,  '  Similitudo  autem 
purgationis  legalis,  et  evangelicse,  non  est  in  modo  purgandi 
sed  ineffectu.'  Than  which  nothing  is  more  false,  nor  more 
directly  contrary  to  the  apostle's  discourse,  chap.  ix.  x. 


132  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

2.  Positively,  and  here,  to  lay  aside  the  manner  how  he 
was  to  do  it,  which  relates  to  his  office  of  priest,  and  prophet, 
and  king,  the  conditions  imposed  upon  him  may  be  referred 
to  three  heads. 

1.  That  he  should  take  on  him  the  nature  of  those,  whom 
he  was  to  bring  to  God.  This  is  as  it  were  prescribed  to 
him  ;  Heb.  x.  5.  *a  body  hast  thou  prepared  me ;'  or  '  ap- 
pointed,' that  I  should  be  made  flesh,  take  a  body  therein  to 
do  thy  will.  And  the  apostle  sets  out  the  infinite  love  of 
the  Son  of  God,  in  that  he  condescended  to  this  inexpres- 
sible exinanition,  and  eclipsing  of  his  glory  ;  Phil.  ii.  6,  7. 
'being  in  the  form  of  God,  and  equal  to  God,  he  made  him- 
self of  no  reputation,  but  took  upon  him  the  form  of  a  ser- 
vant, and  was  made  in  the  likeness  of  man;'  or  made  a  man. 
He  did  it  upon  his  Father's  prescription,  and  in  pursuit  of 
what  God  required  at  his  hands.  Hence  it  is  said,  *  God 
sent  forth  his  Son,  made  of  a  woman  ;'  Gal.  iv.  4.  and  '  God 
sent  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  sinful  flesh  ;'  Rom,  viii. 
3.  and  properly  in  answer  to  this  of  the  Fatt^er's  appointing 
him  a  body,  is  it  that  the  Son  answers,  '  Lo  I  come  to  do 
thy  will.'  I  will  do  it,  I  will  undertake  it ;  that  the  great 
desirable  end  may  be  brought  about,  as  we  shall  see  after- 
ward. So  Heb.  xiv.  15.  And  though  I  see  no  sufficient 
reason  of  relinquishing  the  usual  interpretation  of  (TTrtpjUaToc 
A(5paafx  £7riXaju/3avtrat,  Heb.  ii.  16,  yet  if  it  be  '  apprehendit,' 
and  expressive  of  the  effect ;  not  '  assumpsit,'  relating  to  the 
way  of  his  yielding  us  assistance  and  deliverance,  the  same 
thing  is  intimated. 

2.  That  in  this  'body'  or  human  nature,  he  should  be  a 
*  servant,'  or  yield  obedience  ;  hence  God  calls  him  his  ser- 
vant;  Isa.  xlii.  1.  'Behold  my  servant  whom  I  uphold,' 
and  that  this  was  also  the  condition  prescribed  to  him,  our 
Saviour  acknowledges ;  Isa.  xlix.  5.  '  Now  saith  the  Lord 
that  formed  me  from  the  womb  to  be  his  servant ;'  and  in 
pursuit  hereof,  Christ  takes  upon  him  the  '  form  of  a  servant; 
Phil.  ii.  6.  and  this  is  his  perpetual  profession,  '  I  come  to  do 
the  will  of  him  that  sent  me.' 

'  And  this  commandment  I  have  received  of  my  Father.' 
So  '  though  he  were  a  Son  yet  learned  he  obedience.'  All 
along  in  the  carrying  on  of  his  work  he  professes  that 
this  condition  was  by  his  Father  prescribed  him,  that  he 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  133 

should  be  his  servant,  and  yield  him  obedience,  in  the  work 
he  had  in  hand.  Hence  be  says,  his  Father  is  '^greater  than 
he,'  not  only  in  respect  of  his  humiliation,  but  also  in  respect 
of  the  dispensation  whereunto  he  as  the  Son  of  God  sub- 
mitted himself  to  perform  his  will,  and  yield  him  obedience. 
And  this  God  declares  to  be  the  condition  whereon  he  will 
deliver  man;''  Job  xxxiii.  23.  If  there  be  a  messenger  (a 
servant)  one  of  a  thousand  to  undertake  for  him,  it  shall  be 
so,  I  will  say,  deliver  man  ;  otherwise  not. 

3.  That  he  should  suffer  and  undergo  what  in  justice  is 
due  to  him,  that  he  was  to  deliver.  A  hard  and  great  pre- 
scription ;  yet  such  as  must  be  undergone,  that  there  may 
be  a  consistence  of  the  justice  and  truth  of  God,  with  the 
salvation  of  man.     This   is  plainly  expressed  Isa.  liii.  10. 

*  When  thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,'  or  rather 
•*if  his  soul  shall  make  an  offering  for  sin,  then  he  shall  see 
his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his  days,  and  the  pleasure  of  the 
Lord  shall  prosper  in  his  hands.'  As  if  he  should  say,  if 
this  work  be  brought  about,  and  if  the  counsel  of  peace  which 
we  have  consented  in,  be  carried  on,  if  my  pleasure  therein 
be  to  prosper,  thou  must  make  thy  soul  an  offering  for  sin. 
And  that  this  was  required  of  our  Saviour,  himself  fully  ex- 
presses even  in  his  agony,  when  praying  for  the  removal  of 
the  cup,  he  submits  to  the  drinking  of  it,  in  these  words: 

*  Thy  will  O  Father  be  done ;'  this  is  that,  which  thou  wilt 
have  me  do  ;  which  thou  hast  prescribed  unto  me,  even  that 
'  I  drink  of  this  cup,'  wherein  he  '  tasted  of  death,'  and  which 
comprised  the  whole  of  his  sufferings;  and  this  is  the  third 
thing  in  this  convention  and  agreement. 

4.  Promises  are  made  upon  the  supposition  of  under- 
taking that  which  was  required  ;  and  these  of  all  sorts,  that 
might  either  concern  the  person  that  did  undertake,  or  the 
accomplishment  of  the  work  that  he  did  undertake. 

1.  For  the  person  himself  that  was  to  undertake,  or  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  seeing  there  was  much  difficulty,  and 
great  opposition  to  be  passed  through,  in  what  he  was  to  do 
and  undergo  ;  promises  of  the  assistance  of  his  Father  by  his 
presence  with  him,  and  carrying  him  through  all  perplexities 
and  trials,  are  given  to  him  in  abundance.  Some  of  these 
you  have  Isa.  xlii.  4.  *  He  shall  not  faint,  nor  be  discouraged, 
e  John  xiv.  28.  ''  Vid.  Cocceiuin  in  locum.  \  W33  Dirx  a-irn  DK 


134  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

until  he  hath  set  judgment  in  the  earth.'  And  ver.  6.  '  I  the 
Lord  have  called  thee  in  righteousness,  and  will  hold  thy 
hand,  and  will  keep  thee,  and  give  thee  a  covenant  of  the 
people.'  Whatever  opposition  thou  mayst  meet  withal,  I 
will  hold  tljee,  and  keep  thee,  and  preserve  thee,  *  I  will  not 
leave  thy  soul  in  hell,  nor  suffer  thine  holy  one  to  see  cor- 
ruption ;'  Psal.  xvi.  3.  So  Psal.  Ixxxix.  28.  '  My  mercy  will 
I  keep  for  him  evermore,  and  my  covenant  shall  stand  fast 
with  him.'  And  hence  was  our  blessed  Saviour's  confidence 
in  his  greatest  trial.  Isa.  1.  5 — 9.  ver,  5,  6.  our  Saviour  ex- 
presses his  undertakmg,  and  what  he  suffered  herein,  ver.  7 
— 9.  The  assistance  that  he  was  promised  of  his  Father  in 
this  great  trial,  on  the  account  whereof  he  despises  all  his 
enemies  with  full  assurance  of  success ;  even  upon  the  Fa- 
ther's engaged  promise  of  his  presence  with  him.  This  is 
the  first  sort  of  promises  made  to  Christ  in  this  convention, 
which  concern  himself  directly ;  that  he  should  not  be  for- 
saken in  his  work,  but  carried  through,  supported,  and  up- 
held, until  he  were  come  forth  to  full  success,  and  had  sent 
'  forth  judgment  into  victory.'  Hence  in  his  greatest  trial, 
he  makes  his  address  to  God  himself,  on  the  account  of  these 
promises,  to  be  delivered  from  that '  which  he  feared  ;'  Heb. 
V,  7.  Who  in  the  days,  &c.  So  Psal.  Ixxxix.  27,  28. 

2.  There  were  promises  in  this  compact  that  concerned 
the  work  itself,  that  Christ  undertook;  namely,  that  if  he 
did  what  was  required  of  him,  not  only  that  he  should  be 
preserved  in  it,  but  also,  that  the  work  itself  should  thrive 
and  prosper  in  his  hand.  So  Isa.  liii.  10,  11.  'When  thou 
shalt  make/  &:c.  Whatever  he  aimed  at  is  here  promised  to 
be  accomplished ;  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall  prosper ; 
the  design  of  Father  and  Son  for  the  accomplishment  of  our 
salvation,  shall  prosper.  He  shall  *  see  his  seed,'  a  seed  of 
believers  shall  be  raised  up,  that  shall  *  prolong  their  days ;' 
that  is,  the  seed  shall  prolong,  or  continue  whilst  the  sun 
and  moon  endure  :  all  the  elect  shall  be  justified  and  saved. 
Satan  shall  be  conquered,  and  the  spoil  delivered  from  him. 
And  this  our  Saviour  comforts  himself  withal  in  his  '  great- 
est distress;'  Psal.  xxii,  30,  31.  and  for  this  glory  that  'was 
set  before  him,'  the  glory  of 'bringing  many  sons  to  glory/ 
that  was  promised  to  him,  *  He  despised  the  shame  and  en- 
dured the  cross;  Heb.  xii.  2.  So  also  Isa.  xlii.  1,  2. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  135 

And  this  is  the  third  thing  in  this  compact,  he  who  pre- 
scribes the  hard  conditions  of  incarnation,  obedience,  and 
death,  doth  also  make  the  glorious  promises  of  preservation, 
protection,  and  success.  And  to  make  these  promises  the 
more  eminent,  God  confirms  them  solemnly  by  an  oath ;  he 
is  consecrated  an  high-priest  for  evermore,  by  the  'word  of 
the  oath  ;'  Heb.  vii.  28.  '  The  Lord  sware  and  will  not  re- 
pent, thou  art  a  priest  for  ever,'  &c. 

4.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  accepts  of  the  condition  and 
the  promise,  and  voluntarily  undertakes  the  work.  Psal.  iv. 
7,  8.  '  Then  said  I,  lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will,  yea,  I  delight 
to  do  thy  will,  O  my  God  ;  yea,  thy  law  is  within  my  heart.' 
He  freely,  willingly,  cheerfully,  undertakes  to  do  and  suffer 
whatever  it  was  the  will  of  his  Father  that  he  should  do,  or 
suffer,  for  the  bringing  about  the  common  end  aimed  at.  He 
undertakes  to  be  the  Father's  servant  in  this  work.  And 
says  to  the  Lord,  'thou  art  my  Lord ;'  Psal.  xvi.  2.  thou  art 
he,  to  whom  I  am  to  yield  obedience,  to  submit  to  thee  in 
this  work.  '  Mine  ear  hast  thou  bored,  and  I  am  thy  ser- 
vant.' I  am  not  rebellious,  I  do  not  withdraw  from  it;  Isa. 
L  8.  Hence  the  apostle  tells  us  that  this  mind  was  in  him  ; 
that  whereas  he  was  in  the  '  form  of  God,  he  humbled  him- 
self to  the  death  of  the  cross  ;'  Phil.  ii.  8.  and  so  by  his  own 
voluntary  consent  he  came  under  the  law  of  the  Mediator, 
which  afterward  as  he  would  not,  so  he  could  not  decline. 
He  made  himself  surety  of  the  covenant,  and  so  was  to  pay 
what  he  never  took.  He  voluntarily  engaged  himself  into 
this  sponsion  ;  but  when  he  had  so  done,  he  was  legally  sub- 
ject to  all  that  attended  it ;  when  he  had  put  his  name  into 
the  obligation,  he  became  responsible  for  the  whole  debt, 
and  all  that  he  did  or  suffered,  comes  to  be  called  obedience 
which  relates  to  the  law  that  he  was  subject  to  :  having  en- 
gaged himself  to  his  Father,  and  said  to  the  Lord,  *  Thou  art 
my  Lord,  lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will.' 

5.  The  fifth  and  last  thing  is,  that  on  the  one  side,  the 
promiser  do  approve  and  accept  of  the  performance  of  the 
condition  prescribed,  and  the  undertaker  demand,  and  lay 
claim  to  the  promises  made,  and  thereupon  the  common 
end  designed  be  accomplished  and  fulfilled.  All  this  also 
is  fully  manifest  in  this  compact  or  convention.  God  the 
Father  he  accepts  of  the  performance  of  what  was  to  the 


136  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

Son  prescribed.  This  God  fully  declares  Isa.  xlix.  5,  6. 
'  And  now  saith  the  Lord  that  formed  me  from  the  womb  to 
be  his  servant,  to  bring  Jacob  again  to  him,  though  Israel 
be  not  gathered,  yet  shall  I  be  glorious  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Lord,  and  my  God  shall  be  my  strength.  And  he  said,  it  is 
a  light  thing  that  thou  shouldest  be  my  servant  to  raise  up  the 
tribes  of  Jacob,  and  to  restore  the  preserved  of  Israel :  I  will 
also  give  thee  for  a  light  to  the  Gentiles,  that  thou  mayest 
be  my  salvation  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.'  And  eminently  ver. 
8,  9.  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  in  an  acceptable  time  have  I 
heard  thee;  and  in  a  day  of  salvation  have  I  helped  thee  and 
I  will  preserve  thee  and  give  thee  for  a  covenant  of  the 
people,  to  establish  the  earth  to  cause  to  inherit  the  deso- 
late heritages.  That  thou  mayest  say  to  the  prisoners  go 
forth  ;  to  them  that  are  in  darkness  shew  yourselves/  &.c. 
Now  I  have  been  with  thee  and  helped  thee  in  thy  work  and 
thou  hast  performed  it,  now  thou  shalt  do  all  that  thy  heart, 
desires  according  to  my  promise.  Hence  that  which  was 
originally  spoken  of  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son ;  Psal. 
ii.  7.  '  Thou  art  my  Son  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee,  is 
applied  by  the  apostle  to  his  resurrection  from  the  dead. 
Acts  xiii.  33. '  God  hath  fulfilled  his  word  unto  us,  in  that 
he  hath  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead,'  as  it  is  also  written 
in  Psal.  ii.  *  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee.' 
That  is,  God  by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  gloriously 
manifested  him  to  be  his  Son,  whom  he  loved,  in  whom  he 
was  well  pleased,  and  who  did  all  his  pleasure.  So  Rom,  i.  4. 
'  He  was  declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power,  by  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead.'  Then  was  he  declared  to  be 
the  Son  of  God.  God  approving  and  accepting  the  work 
he  had  done,  loosed  the  pains  of  death,  and  raised  him 
again,  manifesting  to  all  the  world  his  approbation  and  ac- 
ceptation of  him  and  his  work.  Whence  he  immediately 
says  to  him,  Psal.  ii.  8.  '  Ask  of  me,  and  I  will  give  thee  the 
heathen  for  thine  inheritance ;'  now  ask  what  thou  wilt, 
whatever  I  have  promised,  whatever  thou  didst,  or  couldest 
expect  upon  thy  undertaking  this' work,  it  shall  be  done,  it 
shall  be  granted  thee.     And,  ^ 

2.  Christ  accordingly  makes  his  demand  solemnly  on 
earth,  and  in  heaven;  on  earth  John  xvii.  throughout  the 
whole  chapter  is  the  demand  of  Christ,  for  the  accomplish- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  137 

ment  of  the  whole  compact,  and  all  the  promises  that  were 
made  to  him,  when  he  undertook  to  be  a  Saviour,  both 
which  concerned  himself  and  his  church;  see  ver.  1.4 — 6. 
9.  12 — 16,  &c.  and  in  heaven  also  ;  he  is  gone  into  the  pre- 
sence of  God,  there  to  appear  for  us,  Heb.  ix.  24.  and  is  able 
to  '  save  to  the  uttermost  them  that  came  to  God  by  him, 
seeing  he  liveth  for  ever,  to  make  intercession  for  them ;' 
Heb.  vii.  25.  not  as  in  the  days  of  his  flesh,  with  strong 
cries  and  supplications,  but  by  virtue  of  his  oblation,  lay- 
ing claim  to  the  promised  inheritance  in  our  behalf.     And, 

3.  The  whole  work  is  accomplished,  and  the  end  in- 
tended brought  about;  for  in  the  death  of  Christ  he 
*  finished  the  transgression  and  made  an  end  of  sin,  and 
made  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  brought  in  everlasting 
righteousness  ;*  Dan.  ix.  24.  and  of  sinful  man,  God  says, 
deliver  him,  '  for  I  have  found  a  ransom  ;'  Job  xxxiii.  24. 
Hence  our  reconciliation,  justification,  yea,  our  salvation, 
are  in  the  Scripture  spoken  of,  as  things  actually  done  and 
accomplished,  in  the  death  and  bloodsaedding  of  Jesus 
Christ,  not  as  though  we  were  all  then  actually  justified 
and  saved,  but  upon  the  account  of  the  certainty  of  the  per- 
formance, and  accomplishment  of  those  things  in  their  due 
time  towards  us,  and  upon  us,  are  these  things  so  delivered; 
for  in  reference  to  the  undertaking  of  Christ  in  this  cove- 
nant, is  he  called  the  second  Adam,  becoming  a  common 
head  to  his  people,  with  this  difference  ;  that  Adam  was  a 
common  head  to  all  that  came  of  him,  necessarily,  and  as  I 
may  so  say,  naturally,  and  whether  he  would  or  no  ;  'Christ 
is  so  to  his,  voluntarily,  and  by  his  own  consent  and  under- 
taking, as  hath  been  demonstrated ;  now  as  we  all  die  in 
Adam  federally  and  meritoriously,  yet  the  several  indivi- 
duals are  not  in  their  persons  actually  dead  in  sin,  and  ob- 
noxious to  eternal  death,  before  they  are  by  natural  gene- 
ration united  to  Adam,  their  first  head ;  so,  though  all  the 
elect  be  made  alive,  and  saved  federally  and  meritoriously, 
in  the  death  of  Christ,  wherein  also  a  certain  foundation  is 
laid  of  that  efficacy,  which  works  all  these  things  in  us,  and 
for  us,  yet  we  are  not  viritim  made  partakers  of  the  good 
things  mentioned,  before  we  are  united  to  Christ,  by  the 
communication  of  his  Spirit  to  us. 

And  this,  1  say,  is  the  covenant  and  compact,  that  was 

VOL.    IX.  i< 


138  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

between  Father  and  Son,  which  is  the  great  foundation  of 
what  hath  been  said,  and  shall  farther  be  spoken,  about  the 
merit  and  satisfaction  of  Christ ;  here  lies  the  ground  of  the 
righteousness  of  the  dispensation  treated  of;  that  Christ 
should  undergo  the  piinishment  due  to  us,  it  was  done  vo- 
luntarily of  himself;  and  he  did  nothing  but  what  he  had 
power  to  do,  and  command  from  his  Father  to  do  ;  'I  have 
power,'  saith  he,  *  to  lay  down  my  life,  and  power  to  take  it 
again ;  this  command  have  I  received  of  my  Father ;'  where- 
by the  glory  both  of  the  love,  and  justice  of  God  is  exceed- 
ingly exalted.     And, 

1.  This  stops  the  mouth  of  the  Socinian  clamour,  con- 
cerning tlie  unrighteousness  of  one  man's  suffering  per- 
sonally, for  another  man's  sin.  It  is  true,  it  is  so  ;  if  these 
men  be  not  in  such  relation  to  one  another,  that  what  one 
doth  or  suffereth,  the  other  may  be  accounted  to  do  or  suf- 
fer ;  but  it  is  no  unrighteousness,  if  the  hand  offend,  that  the 
head  be  smitten ;  but  Christ  is  our  head,  we  are  his  mem- 
bers. It  is  true,  if  he  that  suffereth  hath  not  power  over 
that  wherein  he  suffers  ;  but  Christ  had  power  to  lay  down 
his  life,  and  take  it  again.  It  is  true,  if  he  that  is  to  suffer, 
or  he  that  is  to  punish,  be  not  willing,  or  agreed  to  the  com- 
mutation ;  but  here  Father  and  Son  as  hath  been  manifested, 
were  fully  agreed  upon  the  whole  matter.  It  may  be  true, 
if  he  who  suffers  cannot  possibly  be  made  partaker  of  any 
good  afterward,  that  shall  balance,  and  overweigh  all  his 
suffering;  not,  where  the  cross  is  endured,  and  the  shame 
despised,  for  the  glory  proposed,  or  set  before  him,  that 
suffers  ;  not  where  he  is  made  law  for  a  season,  that  he  may 
be  crowned  with  dignity  and  honour.     And, 

2.  This  is  the  foundation  of  the  merit  of  Christ.  The 
apostle  tells  us,  Rom.  iv.  4.  what  merit  is ;  it  is  such  an 
adjunct  of  obedience,  as  whereby  the  reward  is  reckoned, 
not  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  God  having  proposed  a  law  fo; 
obedience  unto  Christ,  with  promises  of  such  and  such  re 
wards,  upon  condition  of  fulfilling  the  obedience  requireo  • 
he  performing  that  obedience,  the  reward  is  reckoned  to 
him  of  debt,  or  he  righteously  merited  whatever  was  so  pro- 
mised to  him.  Though  the  compact  was  of  grace,  yet  the 
reward  is  of  debt.  Look  then  whatever  God  promised 
Christ,  upon  his  undertaking  to  be  a  Saviour,  that,  upon 


OB'     THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  139 

the  fulfilling  of  his  will,  he  merited ;  that  himself  should  be 
exalted,  that  he  should  be  the  head  of  his  church,  that  he 
should  see  his  seed,  that  he  should  justify  and  save  them, 
sanctify  and  glorify  them,  was  all  promised  to  him ;  all  me- 
rited by  him.     But  of  this  more  afterward. 

Having  thus  fully  considered  the  threefold  notion  of  the 
death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  price,  a  sacrifice,  and  a  punish- 
ment, and  discovered  the  foundation  of  righteousness  in  all 
this ;  proceed  we  now  to  manifest,  what  are  the  proper  ef- 
fects of  the  death  of  Christ,  under  this  threefold  notion ; 
now  these  also  answerably  are  three. 

1.  Redemption  as  it  is  a  price. 

2.  Reconciliation  as  it  is  a  sacrifice. 

3.  Satisfaction  as  it  is  a  punishment.  Upon  which  foun- 
dation, union  with  Christ,  vocation,  justification,  sanctifica- 
tion,  and  glory  are  built. 


CHAP,  xxvin. 


Of  redemption  by  the  death  of  Christ,  as  it  was  a  price  or  ransom. 

Having  given  before  the  general  notions  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  as  it  is  in  Scripture  proposed,  all  tending  to  mani- 
fest the  way  and  manner  of  the  expiation  of  our  sins,  and 
our  delivery  from  the  guilt  and  punishment  due  to  them,  it 
remains,  that  an  accommodation  of  those  several  notions  of 
it,  be  made  particularly,  and  respectively,  to  the  business  in 
hand. 

The  first  consideration  proposed  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
was  of  it,  as  a  price ;  and  the  issue  and  eflfect  thereof,  is 
redemption.  Hence  Christ  is  spoken  of  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment as  a  redeemer.  Job  xix.  25.  *  I  know  that  my  Redeemer 
lives;'  the  word  there  used  is  bHU  whose  rise  and  use  is 
commonly  known. 

^Kjis  'vindicare  redimere,'  tTriXafji^dvea^ai  in  Greek  which 
is  commonly  used  for  *  suum  vindicare  ;'  6ti  av  rig  KcicXr/jue- 
voc  Vj  KOt  jurjScic  fTTtXajSrjrat,  mv  ovt(o  Tig  Iviavrbv  briovv  kekXtj- 

fxivoig jUTj   l^t<TT(i)  TOiovTOV   Kr{]fiaTog  eTr/XajStcrSrat  fxridtv 

amX^ovTog  Iviavrov.  Plato  de  Legib.  12.    And  that  may  be 

L  2 


140  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

the  sense  of  the  word  ETrtXajStro,  if  not  in  the  effect,  yet  in 
the  cause;  Heb.  ii.l6. 

The  rise  and  use  of  this  word,  in  this  business  of  our 
deliverance  by  Christ  we  have.  Lev.  xxv.25.'  if  any  of  his  kin 
come  to  redeem  it.'  3"ipn  )bki '  redimens  illud  propinquus  ;' 
the  next  who  is  goel  too,  [goel  is  to]  redeem  it,  or  vindicate 
the  possession  out  of  morgage.  On  this  account  Boaz  tells 
Ruth,  that  in  respect  of  the  possession  of  Elimelech,  he  was 
goel;  Ruth  iii.  13.  a  redeemer,  which  we  have  translated,  a 
'  kinsman,'  because  he  was  to  do  that  office  by  right  of  pro- 
pinquity of  blood,  or  nearness  of  kin,  as  is  evident  from  the 
law  before-mentioned.  Christ  coming  to  vindicate  us  into 
liberty,  by  his  own  blood,  is  called  by  Job  his  goel;  so  also 
is  he  termed ;  Isa.  xli.  14.  -j'pNJ  thy  '  redeemer,'  or  thy  next 
kinsman ;  and  chap,  xliv,  6.  in  that  excellent  description 
of  Christ,  ver.  24.  chap.  xlvi.  4.  xlviii.  17.  xlix.  26.  liv.5. 
lix. 20.  Ix.  16.  Ixiii.  16.  and  in  sundry  other  places;  nei- 
ther is  the  church  of  God  at  all  beholding  to  some  late  ex- 
positors, who,  to  shew  their  skill  in  the  Hebrew  doctors, 
would  impose  upon  us  their  interpretations,  and  make  those 
expressions  to  signify  deliverance  in  general,  and  to  be  re- 
ferred to  God  the  Father,  seeing  that  the  rise  of  the  use  of 
the  word  plainly  restrains  the  redemption  intended,  to  the 
paying  of  a  price  for  it,  which  was  done  only  by  Jesus 
Christ ;  so  Jer.  xxxii.  7,  8.  Hence  they  that  looked  for  the 
Messiah,  according  to  the  promise,  are  said  to  look  for,  or 
to  wait  for  Xvrpwcnv,  '  redemption  in  Israel ;'  Luke  ii.  28. 
and  in  the  accomplishment  of  the  promise ;  the  apostle  tells 
us,  that  Christ  by  his  blood  obtained  for  us  eternal  redemp- 
tion; Heb.  ix.  12.  and  he  having  so  obtained  it,  we  are  jus- 
tified freely  by  the  grace  of  God,  Sm  rrjc  diroXvTpwaeujg  rrjc  Iv 
Ypi<T7(o  'It/(7ou,  by  the  redemption  that  is  in  Jesus  Christ,  Iv 
for  8ia,  '  in  him,'  for,  '  by  him,'  or  wrought  by  him  ;  and  this 
being  brought  home  to  us,  we  have  redemption  through  his 
blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sin  ;  Eph.  i,  7.  Col.  i.  14. 
whence  he  is  said  to  be  'made  unto  us,'  cnroXvTpuymg,  or  're- 
demption ;'   1  Cor.  i.  30. 

How  this  is  done,  will  be  made  evident,  by  applying  of 
what  is  now  spoken,  to  what  was  spoken  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  as  a  price ;  Christ  giving  himself  or  his  life  Xvr^oi' 
and  dvTiXvTpov,  a  price  of  redemption,  as  hath  been  shewed. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  141 

a  ransom ;  those  for  whom  he  did  it,  become  to  have  Xv- 
rpbicTiv  and  dTroXvrpwaiv,  redemption  thereby,  or  deliverance 
from  the  captivity  wherein  they  were.  And  our  Saviour 
expresses  particularly,  how  this  was  done  as  to  both  parts, 
Matt.  XX.  28.  He  came  dovvaiTrjv  -ipvxnv  Xvrpov  avrl  TroXAwv, 
that  is,  he  came  to  be  andvTi(j>vxog,  one  to  stand  in  the  room 
of  others,  and  to  give  his  life  for  them. 

To  make  this  the  more  evident  and  clear,  I  shall  give  a 
description  of  redemption  properly  so  called,  and  make  ap- 
plication of  it  in  the  several  parts  thereof,  unto  that  under 
consideration. 

Redemption  is  the  deliverance  of  any  one  from  bondage 
or  captivity,  and  the  misery  attending  that  condition,  by 
the  intervention  or  interposition  of  a  price  or  ransom,  paid 
by  the  redeemer,  to  him  by  whose  authority  he  is  detained, 
that  being  delivered,  he  may  be  in  a  state  of  liberty,  at  the 
disposal  of  the  redeemer. 

And  this  will  comprise  the  laws  of  this  redemption,  which 
are  usually  given.     They  are  on  the.  part  of  the  redeemer. 

1 .  '  Propinquus  esto/  *  Let  him  be  near  of  kin.' 

2.  '  Consanguinitatis  jure  redimito,'  '  Let  him  redeem  by 
right  of  consanguinity.' 

3.  '  Injusto  possessor]  praedam  eripito ;'  '  Let  him  deliver 
the  prey  from  the  unjust  possessor.' 

4.  'Huic  pretium  nullum  solvito  ;'  'to  him  let  no  price 
be  paid.' 

5.  '  Sanguinem  pro  redemptionis  pretio  vero  domino  of- 
ferto  ;'  '  Let  him  offer,  or  give  his  blood  to  the  true  Lord  for 
a  ransom,  or  price  of  redemption.' 

2."  On  the  part  of  the  redeemed. 

1.  *  Libertatis  jure  felix  gaudeto  ;'  '  Let  him  enjoy  his 
liberty.' 

2.  'Servitutis  jugiim  ne  iterum  sponte  suscipito ;'  '  Let 
him  not  again  willingly  take  on  him  the  yoke  of  bondage.' 

3.  *  Deinceps  servum  se  exhibeto  redemptori;'  *  Let  him 
in  liberty  be  a  servant  to  his  redeemer.' 

The  general  parts  of  this  description  of  redemption,  So- 
cinus  himself  consents  unto  ;  for  whereas  Covel  had  a  little 
inconveniently  defined  '  to  redeem,'  saying,  *  Redimere  ali- 
quem  est  debitum  solvere  creditoris  ejus  nomine,  qui  solven- 
do  n  on  erat,  sicque  satisfacere  creditori ;'  which  is  a  proper 


142  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

description  of  the  payment  of  another  man's  debt,  and  not 
of  his  redemption.  Socinus,  correcting  this  mistake,  affirms, 
that,  '  Rediraere  aliquem,  nihil  aliud  proprie  significat,  quam 
qaptivum  e  manibus  illius  qui  eum  detinet  pretio  illi  dato 
liberare.'  *  To  redeem  any  one  properly,  signifies  nothing 
else,  but  to  deliver  him  out  of  his  hands  that  detained  him 
captive,  by  a  price  given  to  him  who  detained  him.'  Which 
as  to  the  general  nature  of  redemption,  contains  as  much 
as  vi^hat  was  before  given  in  for  the  description  of  it ;  (So- 
cin.  de  Jes.  Christo  Servatore,  lib.  1.  part.  2.  cap.  1.)  With 
the  accommodation,  therefore,  of  that  description  to  the  re- 
demption which  we  have  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  I  shall  pro- 
ceed :  desiring  the  reader  to  remember,  that  if  I  evince  the 
redemption  we  have  by  Christ  to  be  proper,  and  properly  so 
called,  the  whole  business  of  satisfaction  is  confessedly 
evinced. 

1.  The  general  nature  of  it  consists  in  deliverance  ; 
thence  Christ  is  called  6 /ouo^uevoc/ the  deliverer;'  Rom.  xi.  26. 
as  it  is  written,  *  there  shall  come  out  of  Sionthe  deliverer;' 
the  word  in  the  prophet,  Isa.  lix.  20.  is  ^KJ  that  we  may 
know  what  kind  of  deliverer  Christ  is ;  a  deliverer  by  re- 
demption :  he  gave  himself  for  our  sin,  ottwc  l^iXryrai  r]fiag. 
Gal  i.  4.  *  that  he  might  deliver  us  :'  he  delivered  us  ;  but  it 
is  by  giving  himself  for  our  sin  ;  1  Thess.  i.  10.  '  To  wait  for 
his  Son  from  heaven,  whom  he  raised  from  the  dead  ;' 
'Itjo-owv  Tov  pvofJievov  J^juac  ottot^c  opyrigTrig  £p\Ofitv^g,  'Jesus, 
who  delivered  us  from  the  wrath  to  come ;'  so  Luke  i.  74. 
Rom.  vii.  6.  Heb.  ii.  15.  Col.  i.  13. 

Now  as  redemption,  because  its  general  nature  consists 
in  deliverance,  is  often  expressed  thereby  ;  so  deliverance, 
because  it  hath  the  effect  of  redemption,  is,  or  may  be  called 
redemption,  though  it  be  not  properly  so,  but  agree  in  the 
end,  and  effect  only  :  thence  Moses  is  said  to  be  XvTptoTrjg, 
Acts  vii.  35.  tovtov  b  Gcoc  apxovra  koX  \vTp(i)Triv  aTriareiXev' 
'  Him  did  God  send  a  prince,  and  a  redeemer :'  that  is,  a  de- 
liverer ;  one  whom  God  used  for  the  deliverance  of  his 
people.  And  because  what  he  did,  even  the  delivery  of  his 
people  out  of  bondage,  agreed  with  redemption  in  its  end, 
the  work  itself  it  called  redemption,  and  he  is  termed  therein 
a  redeemer,  though  it  was  not  a  direct  redemption  that  he 
wrought ;  no  ransom  being  paid  for  delivery. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  143 

It  is  pleaded,  that  God  being  said  to  redeem  his  people 
in  sundry  places  in  the  Old  Testament,  which  he  could  not 
possibly  do,  by  a  ransom,  therefore  the  redemption  men- 
tioned in  the  Scripture,  is  metaphorical ;  a  mere  deliverance : 
and  such  is  also  that  we  have  by  Christ  without  the  inter- 
vention of  any  price. 

2.  Moses,  who  was  a  type  of  Christ  and  a  redeemer,  who 
is  so  often  said  to  redeem  the  people,  yet  as  it  is  known,  did 
it  without  any  ransom,  by  a  mere  deliverance  ;  therefore  did 
Christ  so  also. 

Not  to  trouble  the  reader  with  repetition  of  words,  this 
is  the  sum  of  what  is  pleaded  by  the  Racovian  catechism  to 
prove  our  redemption  by  Christ,  not  to  be  proper,  but  meta- 
phorical, and  so  consequently  that  no  satisfaction  can  be 
thence  evinced. 

*  E  verbo  redimendi  non  posse  efRci  satisfactionem  banc 
hinc  est  planum,  quod  de  ipso  Deo  in  novo  et  in  prisco 
fcedere  scribitur,  eum  redimisse  populum  suum  ex  Egypto, 
eum  fecisse  redemptionem  populo  suo  ;  quod  Moses  fuerit 
redemptor,  Act.  vii.  35.  Vox  ideo  redemptionis,  simpli- 
citer  liberationem  denotat.'  Rac.  Catec.  cap.  8.  de  Christo. 

And  indeed  what  there  they  speak  is  the  sum  of  the  plea 
of  Socinus  as  to  this  part  of  our  description  of  redemption  : 
*  de  Jesu  Christo  Servatore,'  lib.  i.  part.  2.  cap.  1,2,  3. 

To  remove  these  difficulties  (if  they  may  be  so  called)  I 
shall  only  tender  the  ensuing  considerations. 

1.  That  because  redemption  is  sometimes  to  betaken 
metaphorically  for  mere  deliverance,  when  it  is  spoken  of 
God  without  any  mention  of  a  price  or  ransom,  in  such  cases 
as  wherein  it  was  impossible  that  a  ransom  should  be  paid, 
(as  in  the  deliverance  of  the  children  of  Israel  from  Epypt 
and  Pharaoh),  when  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  done  by*  power, 
and  outstretched  arm,  therefore  it  must  be  so  understood, 
when  it  is  spoken  of  Christ  the  Mediator,  with  express  men- 
tion of  a  price  or  ransom,  and  when  it  was  impossible  but 
that  a  ransom  must  be  paid,  is  a  loose  consequence,  not  de- 
serving any  notice. 

2.  That  all  the  places  of  Scripture,  where  mention  is 
made  of  God  being  a  redeemer,  and  redeeming  his  people, 
may  be  referred  unto  these  heads  : 

a  Deut.iv.  34. 


144  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

1.  Such  as  call  God  the  redeemer  of  his  church  in  gene- 
ral, as  the  places  before-mentioned  ;  and  these  are  all  to  be 
referred  immediately  to  the  Son  of  God  (the  manner  of  his 
redemption  being  described  in  the  New  Testament),  and  so 
proper  redemption  is  intended  in  them  ;  Isa.  liv.  5,  6.  with 
Eph.  V.  25,  26. 

2.  Such  as  mention  some  temporal  deliverance,  that  was 
typical  of  the  spiritual  redemption,  which  we  have  by  Jesus 
Christ ;  and  it  it  called  redemption,  not  so  much  from  the 
general  nature  of  deliverance,  as  from  its  pointing  out  to  us 
that  real  and  proper  redemption,  that  was  typified  by  it. 
Such  was  God's  redeeming  his  people  out  of  Egypt.  So 
there  is  no  mention  of  redemption  in  the  Scripture,  but 
either  it  is  proper,  or  receives  that  appellation  from  its  re- 
lation to  that  which  is  so. 

3.  This  is  indeed  a  very  wretched  and  cursed  way  of 
interpreting  Scripture,  especially  those  passages  of  it  which 
set  out  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  love  of  Christ  to  us  ; 
namely,  to  do  it  by  way  of  diminution,  and  lessening  ;  God 
takes  and  uses  this  word  that  is  of  use  amongst  men ;  namely, 
of  redemption  :  saith  he,  *  Christ  hath  redeemed  you  with 
his  own  blood,  he  hath  laid  down  a  price  for  you  :'  for  men 
to  come  and  interpret  this,  and  say  he  did  it  not  properly, 
it  was  not  a  complete  redemption,  but  metaphorical,  a  bare 
deliverance,  is  to  blaspheme  God  and  the  work  of  his  love 
and  grace.  It  is  a  safe  rule  of  interpreting  Scripture,  that 
in  places  mentioning  the  love  and  grace  of  God  to  us,  the 
words  are  to  be  taken  in  their  utmost  significancy.  It  is  a 
thing  most  unworthy  a  good  and  wise  man,  to  set  out  his 
kindness  and  benefits  with  great  swelling  words,  of  mighty 
weight  and  importance,  which  when  the  things  signified  by 
them  come  to  be  considered,  must  be  interpreted  by  way  of 
minoration ;  nor  will  any  worthy  man  do  so.  Much  less  can 
it  be  once  imagined,  that  God  has  expressed  his  love  and 
kindness,  and  the  fruits  of  it  to  us,  in  great  and  weighty 
words,  that  in  their  ordinary  use  and  significancy  contain  a 
great  deal  more  than  really  he  hath  done  ;  for  any  one  so  to 
interpret  what  he  hath  spoken,  is  an  abomination  into  which 
I  desire  my  soul  may  never  enter. 

What  the  redemption  of  a  captive  is,  and  how  it  is 
brought  about  we   know,     God  tells  us,  that  Christ  hath 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST.  145 

redeemed  us,  and  that  with  his  own  blood.  Is  it  not  better 
to  believe  the  Lord,  and  venture  our  souls  upon  it,  than  to 
go  to  God  and  say,  *  this  thou  hast  said,  indeed  ;  but  it  is  an 
improper  and  metaphorical  redemption,  a  deliverance  that 
we  have  V  The  truth  is,  it  is  so  far  from  truth,  that  God  hath 
delivered  the  work  of  his  grace,  and  our  benefit  thereby,  in 
the  death  of  Christ,  in  words  too  big  in  their  proper  signi- 
fication for  the  things  themselves,  that  no  words  whatever 
are  sufficient  to  express  it  and  convey  it  to  our  understand- 
ings. 

3.  That  Moses,  who  was  a  type  of  Christ  in  the  work 
of  redemption,  and  is  called  a  redeemer,  did  redeem  the 
people  without  the  proper  payment  of  a  valuable  ransom ; 
therefore  Christ  did  so  also  ;  to  conclude  thus,  I  say,  is  to 
say,  that  the  type  and  things  typified  must  in  all  things  be 
alike ;  yea,  that  a  similitude  between  them  in  that  wherein 
their  relation  consists,  is  not  enough  to  maintain  their  rela- 
tion, but  there  must  be  such  an  identity  as  in  truth  over- 
throws it.  Christ  tells  us,  that  the  brazen  serpent  was  a 
type  of  him;  John  iii.  14.  '  As  Moses  lifted  up  the  brazen 
serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man  be 
lifted  up  ;'  now  if  a  man  should  thence  argue,  that  because 
the  brazen  serpent  was  only  lifted  up,  not  crucified,  nor  did 
shed  his  blood,  therefore  Christ  was  not  crucified,  nor  shed 
his  blood,  would  he  be  attended  unto  ?  The  like  may  be 
said  of  Jonas,  who  was  alive  in  the  belly  of  the  whale,  when 
he  was  a  type  of  Christ,  being  dead  in  the  earth ;  in  the  ge- 
nei-al  nature  of  deliverance  from  captivity,  there  was  an 
agreement  in  the  corporeal  deliverance  of  Moses  and  the 
spiritual  of  Christ,  and  here  was  the  one  a  type  of  the  other ; 
in  the  manner  of  their  accomplishment,  the  one  did  not  re- 
present the  other  ;  the  one  being  said  expressly  to  be  done 
by  power,  the  other  by  a  ransom. 

2.  It  is  the  delivery  of  one  in  captivity  ;  till  men  consi- 
dered in  the  state  of  sin,  and  alienation  from  God,  are  in 
captivity.  Hence  they  are  said  to  be  captives,  and  to  be 
bound  in  prison  ;  Isa.  Ixi.  1.  and  the  work  of  Christ  is  to 
bring  the  prisoners  out  of  prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  dark- 
ness (that  is  in  the  dungeon),  out  of  the  prison  house  ;  Isa. 
xlii.  7. he  saysto  the  prisoners  'go  forth,' to  them  thatare  in 
darkness,  *  shew  yourselves  ;'chap.  xlix.  9.  as  it  is  eminently 


146  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

expressed  ;  Zech.  ix.  11,  'As  for  thee  also  by  the  blood  of 
the  covenant  I  have  sent  forth  thy  prisoners  out  of  the  pit 
wherein  there  is  no  water.'  Here  are  prisoners,  prisoners 
belonging  to  the  daughter  of  Sion,  for  unto  them,  the  church, 
bespeaks,  ver.  9.  *  Rejoice  greatly,  O  daughter  of  Sion;' 
those  other  sheep  of  the  fold  of  Christ  not  yet  gathered 
when  this  promise  was  given,  are  spoken  of.  And  they  are 
in  the  pit  wherein  there  is  no  water ;  a  pit  for  security  to 
detain  them,  that  they  may  not  escape  :  and  without  water, 
that  they  may  in  it  find  no  refreshment.  How  are  these 
prisoners  delivered  ?  By  the  blood  of  this  covenant,  of 
whom  he  speaks  ;  see  ver.  9.  '  Behold  thy  king  cometh  unto 
thee:  he  is  just,  and  having  salvation ;  lowly,  and  riding 
upon  an  ass,  and  upon  a  colt  the  foal  of  an  ass.'  It  is  a 
description  of  Christ  when  he  rode  to  Jerusalem,  to  seal  and 
confirm  the  covenant  for  the  deliverance  of  the  prisoners 
with  his  own  blood  ;  which  is  therefore  called  the  blood  of 
the  covenant,  with  which  he  was  sanctified ;  Heb.  x.  29. 
Hence  in  the  next  verse,  'prisoners  of  hope'  is  a  description 
of  the  elect;  Zech.  ix.  12. 

So  also  are  they  called  captives  expressly,  Isa.  xlix.  25. 
*  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  even  the  captives  of  the  mighty  shall 
be  taken  away,  and  the  prey  of  the  terrible  shall  be  delivered ;' 
those  who  were  in  their  captivity  a  prey  to  Satan,  that 
mighty  and  cruel  one,  shall  be  delivered  ;  and  who  shall  do 
this  ?  '  The  Lord  thy  Saviour,  and  thy  Redeemer,  the  mighty 
one  of  Jacob;'  ver.  26.  He  proclaims  liberty  to  the  captives ; 
Isa.  Ixvii.  1.  Luke  iv.  18.  And  this  is  given  in  as  the  great 
fruit  of  the  death  of  Christ,  that  upon  his  conquest  of  it 
he  led  'captivity  captive;'  Psal.  Ixviii.  18.  Eph.  iv.  8.  that 
is,  either  captivity  actively,  Satan  who  held  and  detained 
his  in  captivity;  or  passively,  those  who  were  in  captivity  to 
him. 

Thus  being  both  prisoners  and  captives,  they  are  said  to 
be  in  bondage ;  Christ  gives  us  liberty  from  that  yoke  of 
bondage  ;  Gal.  v.  1.  and  men  are  in  bondage  by  reason  of 
death  all  their  days;  Heb.  ii.  14.  There  is,  indeed,  nothing 
that  the  Scripture  more  abounds  in,  than  this,  that  men  in 
the  state  of  sin  are  in  prison,  captivity,  and  bondage ;  are 
captives,  prisoners  and  slaves. 

Concerning  this  two  things  are  considerable. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  147 

1.  The  cause  of  men's  bondage  and  captivity,  deserving, 
or  procuring  it. 

2.  The  efficient  principal  cause  cf  it,  to  whom  they  are 
in  captivity. 

For  the  first  (as  it  is  known)  it  is  sin.  To  all  this  bond- 
age and  captivity  men  are  sold  by  sin.  In  this  business  sin 
is  considered  two  ways. 

1.  As  a  debt,  whereof  God  is  the  creditor.  Our  Saviour 
hath  taught  us  to  pray  for  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins  under 
that  notion.  Matt.  vi.  12.  a^tc  vixiv  to.  6(p£i\{]fiaTari/xwv,  'remit 
to  us  our  debts  ;'  and  in  the  parable  of  the  Lord  and  his  ser- 
vants. Matt,  xviii.  27 — 29.  he  calls  it,  to  davsiov,  ver.  27. 
and  TO  o^u\6fiivov,  ver.  30.  '  due  debt;'  all  which  he  ex- 
pounds by  TrapaTTTWjuara,  ver.  35.  'offences  or  transgressions.' 
Debt  makes  men  liable  to  prison  for  non-payment,  and  so  doth 
sin  (without  satisfaction  made)  to  the  prison  of  hell.  So  our 
Saviour  expresses  it.  Matt.  v.  25,  26.  '  Agree  quickly  with 
thine  adversary,  whiles  thou  art  in  the  way  with  him ;  lest 
at  any  time  the  adversary  deliver  thee  to  the  judge,  and  the 
judge  deliver  thee  to  the  officer,  and  thou  be  cast  into  prison. 
Verily  I  say  unto  thee,  thou  shalt  by  no  means  come  out 
thence,  till  thou  hast  paid  the  utmost  farthing.'  On  this  ac- 
count, 1.  Are  men  prisoners  for  sin:  they  are  bound  in 
the  prison-house,  because  they  have  wasted  the  goods  of 
their  master,  and  contracted  a  debt  that  they  are  no  way 
able  to  pay  :  and  if  it  be  not  paid  for  them,  there  they  must 
lie  to  eternity.  All  mankind  was  cast  into  prison,  for  that 
great  debt  they  contracted  in  Adam,  in  their  trustee ;  being- 
there  instead  of  making  any  earnings  to  pay  the  debt  already 
upon  them  by  the  law,  they  contract  more,  and  increase 
thousands  of  talents.  But  this  use  of  the  word  debt  and 
prison,  applied  to  sin  and  punishment,  is  metaphorical. 

2.  As  a  crime,  rebellion,  transgression  against  God,  the 
great  governor,  and  judge  of  all  the  world.  The  criminal- 
ness,  rebellion,  transgression,  the  disobedience  that  is  in  sin, 
is  more  or  less  expressed  by  all  the  words  in  the  original, 
whereby  any  sins  are  signified  and  called  :  now  for  sin  con- 
sidered as  rebellion,  are  men  cast  into  prison,  captivity  and 
bondage,  by  way  of  judicial  process  and  punishment. 

2.  For  the  principal  cause  of  this  captivity  and  imprison- 
ment, it  is  God  :  For, 


148  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

1.  He  is  the  creditor  to  whom  these  debts  are  due.  Matt.  vi. 
12.  'Our  Father  which  art  in  heaven,  forgive  us  our  debts  ;' 
it  is  to  him  that  we  stand  indebted  the  ten  thousand  talents  ; 
'against  thee  only  have  I  sinned,'  says  David,  Psal.  li.  4. 
God  hath  intrusted  us  with  all  we  have  to  sin  by,  or  withal; 
he  hath  lent  it  us,  to  lay  out  for  his  glory,  our  spending  of 
what  we  have  received  upon  our  lusts,  is  running  into  debt 
unto  God  ;  though  he  doth  not  reap  where  he  did  not  sow, 
yet  he  requires  his  principal  with  advantage. 

2.  And  properly,  he  is  the  great  King,  Judge,  and  Go- 
vernor of  the  world,  who  hath  given  his  law,  the  rule  of  our 
obedience ;  and   every  transgression  thereof  is  a  rebellion 
against  him.     Hence,  to  sin,  is  to  rebel,  and  to   transgress, 
and  to  be  perverse,  to  turn  aside  from  the  way,  to  cast  oiF 
the  yoke  of  the  Lord,  as  it  is  every  where  expressed.     God 
is  the  law-giver,  James  iv.  12.  '  who  is  able  to  kill  and  to  de- 
stroy' for  the  transgression  of  it;  it  is  his  law  which  is  broken, 
and  upon  the  breach  whereof,  he  says,  'cursed  be  every  one 
that  hath  so  done  ;'  Deut.  xxix.  29.    He  is  the  judge  of  all 
the  earth ;  Gen.  xviii.  25,  26.  yea,  '  the  Lord  is  judge  himself,' 
Psal,  1.  6.  and  we  shall  be  judged  by  his  law;  James  ii.lO — 12. 
and  his  judgment  is,  *  that  they  that  commit  sin  are  worthy 
of  death  ;'  Rom.  i.  32.  and  he  is  the  'king  for  ever  and  ever.' 
Psal.  X.  16.  He  reigneth  and  executeth  judgment.     Now  who 
should  commit  the  rebel  that  offends  ?    who  should  be  the 
author  of  the  captivity,  and  imprisonment  of  the  delinquent, 
but  he  who  is  the  king,  judge,  and  law-maker? 

3.  He  doth  actually  do  it;  Rom.  xi.  32.  Svv£KX£t<TE  oQeog 
TovQ  rravTa^  eig  aTTH^eiav'  '  God  hath  shut  up  all  under  disobe- 
dience :'  he  hath  laid  them  up  close  prisoners,  for  their  dis- 
obedience :  and  they  shall  not  go  out,  until  satisfaction  be 
made.  In  the  parable.  Matt,  xviii.  of  the  lord  or  master, 
and  his  servants,  this  is  evident ;  and  Matt.  v.  25.  it  is  the 
judge,  that  delivers  the  man  to  the  officer,  to  be  cast  into . 
prison.  Look  who  it  is  that  shall  inflict  the  final  punish- 
ment upon  the  captives,  if  a  ransom  be  not  paid  for  them  ; 
he  it  is,  by  whose  power  and  authority  they  are  committed, 
and  to  whom  principally  they  are  prisoners  and  captives. 
Now  this  is  God  only,  he  can  '  cast  both  body  and  soul  into 
hell  fire;'  Matt.  x.  28.  and  wicked  men  shall  be  destroyed 
from  the  terror  of  his  presence,  andthe  power  of  his  glory; 


OF    THE     SATISBACTION    OF    CHRIST.  149 

2  Thess.  i.  9.  In  brief,  God  is  the  judge,  the  law  is  the  law 
of  God,  the  sentence  denounced  is  condemnation  from  God  : 
the  curse  inflicted,  is  the  curse  of  God ;  the  wrath  where- 
with men  are  punished,  is  the  wrath  of  God  ;  he  that  finds 
a  ransom  is  God,  and  therefore  it  is  properly  and  strictly  he, 
to  whom  sinners  are  prisoners  and  captives  ;  2.  Pet.  ii.  4. 

And  therefore,  when  in  the  Scripture  at  any  time,  men  are 
said  to  be  in  bondage  to  Satan  :  it  is  but  as  to  the  officer 
of  a  judge,  or  the  jailor  :  to  their  sin,  it  is  but  as  to  their 
fetters,  as  shall  be  afterward  more  fully  discovered. 

And  this  removes  the  first  question  and  answer  of  the  Ra- 
covians  to  this  purpose.  Socinus  '  De  Servatore,'  expresses 
himself  to  the  whole  business  of  redemption,  in  three  chap- 
ters, lib.  1.  part.  2.  cap.  1 — 3.  the  sum  of  which,  the  ca- 
techists  have  laboured  to  comprise  in  as  many  questions 
and  answers.     The  first  is, 

'  Q.  What*"  dost  thou  answer  to  these  testimonies  which 
witness  that  we  are  redeemed  of  Christ  ?' 

'  A.  It  is  hence  evident,  that  satisfaction  cannot  be  con- 
firmed from  the  word  redeeming,  because  it  is  written  of 
God  himself,  both  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  that  he 
redeemed  his  people  out  of  Egypt,  that  he  redeemed  his  peo- 
ple. 2.  Because  it  is  written  that  God  redeemed  Abraham 
and  David,  and  that  Moses  was  a  redeemer,  and  that  we  are 
redeemed  from  our  iniquities,  and  our  vain  conversation, 
and  from  the  curse  of  the  law ;  for  it  is  certain,  that  God 
made  satisfaction  to  none,  nor  can  it  be  said,  that  satisfac- 
tion is  made  either  to  our  iniquities,  or  our  vain  conversa- 
tion, or  to  the  law.' 

I  say  this  whole  plea  is  utterly  removed  by  what  hath 
been  spoken:  For  1.  In  what  sense  redemption  is  ascribed 
to  God  and  Moses,  without  the  least  prejudice  of  that  pro- 
per redemption  that  was  made  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  hath 
been  declared,  and  shall  be  farther  manifested,  when  we 

•>  Quid  ad  ca  testimonia,  quae  nos  a  Christo  testantur  redemptos,  respondes? — 
R.  Everbo  redimeiidi  non  posse  effici  satisfactionem  banc,  bine  est  planum,  quod 
de  ipso  Deo  et  in  novo,  et  in  prisco  foedere  scribitur,  eum  rediniisse  populum  suura 
ex  ^gypto;  eum  fecisse  redemptionem  populo  suo ;  deinde  cum  scriptum  sit,  quod 
Deus  rederait  Abrahamum  et  Davidem,  et  quod  Moses  fuerit  redeniptor,  et  quod 
simus  redempti  e  nostris  iniquitatibiis,  aut  e  vana  conversatione  nostra,  et  e  male- 
dictione  legis  :  certura  autum  est  Deum  nemini  satisfecisse  ;  nee  vero  aut  iniquita- 
tibus,  aut  conversationi  vanw,  aut  Icgi  satisfactura  esse  dici  posse. 


150  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

come  to  demonstrate  the  price  that  was  paid  in  this  redemp- 
tion. 

2.  It  is  true,  there  is  no  satisfaction  made  to  our  sin 
and  vain  conversation,  when  we  are  redeemed  :  but  satisfac- 
tion being  made  to  him  to  whom  it  is  due,  we  are  delivered 
from  them.     But  of  this  afterward. 

3.  Satisfaction  is  properly  made  to  the  law,  when  the 
penalty  which  it  threatens  and  prescribes,  is  undergone,  as 
in  the  case  insisted  on  it  was.  In  the  meantime,  our  cate- 
chists  are  sufficiently  vain,  in  supposing  our  argument  to  lie 
in  the  word  '  redimere ;'  though  something  hath  been  spoken 
of  the  word  in  the  original,  yet  our  plea  is  from  the  thing 
itself. 

This  Socinus  thus  expresses. 

'*^There  is  also  required  he  who  held  the  captive,  other- 
wise he  is  not  a  captive.  To  him  in  our  deliverance,  if  we 
will  consider  the  thing  itself  exactly,  many  things  do  an- 
swer, for  many  things  do  detain  us  captives ;  now  they  are 
sin,  the  devil,  and  the  world,  and  that  which  foUoweth  sin, 
the  guilt  of  eternal  death,  or  the  punishment  of  death  ap- 
pointed to  us.' 

Ans.  A  lawful  captive  is  detained  two  ways ;  directly, 
and  that  two  ways  also,  legally,  juridically,  and  authori- 
tatively :  so  is  sinful  man  detained  captive  of  God.  The 
wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him,  John  iii.  36.  as  hath  been 
declared. 

2.  Instrumentally,  in  subservience  to  the  authority  of  the 
other.  So  is  man  in  bondage  to  Satan,  and  the  law,  and 
fear  of 'death  to  come;'  Heb.  ii.  14,  15. 

3.  Consequentially,  and  by  accident;  so  a  man  is  de- 
tained by  his  shackles,  as  in  the  filth  of  the  prison :  so  is  a 
man  captive  to  sin,  and  the  world ;  nor  are  all  these  pro- 
perly the  detainers  of  us  in  captivity,  from  which  we  are 
redeemed,  any  more  than  the  gallows  keeps  a  malefactor  in 
prison,  from  which  by  a  pardon  and  ransom  he  is  delivered. 

To  proceed  with  the  description  of  redemption  given ;  it 

*  Requiritur  et  is,  qui  captivum  detineat :  alioqui  captivus  non  esset :  huic  in  libe- 
ratione  nostra,  si  exactius  rem  ipsam  considerare  velimus,  respondent  multa.  Multa 
siquidem  nos  tanquara  captives  detinebant :  ea  autem  sunt  peccatuin,  diabolus, 
mundus,  et  qui  peccatuin  consequuntur,  mortis  feternae  reatus,  seu  mortis  aeternffi 
nobis  decretum  suppiicium.  De  Servator.  Lib.  1.  Cap.  2. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  151 

is  the  delivery  of  him  who  was  captive  from  prison,  or  cap- 
tivity, and  all  the  miseries  attending  that  condition. 

1.  What  I  mean  by  the  prison,  is  easily  gathered  from 
what  hatli  been  delivered  concerning  the  prisoner  or  captive, 
and  him  that  holds  him  captive.  If  the  captive  be  a  sinner 
as  a  sinner,  and  he  who  hold  him  captive  be  God,  by  his 
justice  making  him  liable  to  punishment,  his  captivity  must 
needs  be  his  obnoxiousness  unto  the  wrath  of  God  on  the 
account  of  his  justice  for  sin.  This  are  we  delivered  from 
by  this  redemption,  that  is  in  the  blood  of  Jesus,  Rom.  iii. 
23 — 25.  *  For  all  have  sinned,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of 
God:  being  justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  re- 
demption that  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  Whom  God  hath  set  forth 
to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood,  to  declare 
his  righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past, 
through  the  forbearance  of  God.'  Ver.  23.  is  the  description 
of  the  state  of  our  captivity  ;  *  having  sinned  we  are  come 
short  of  the  glory  of  God ;'  vaTspovvrai  they  fall  short  in 
their  race,  and  are  by  no  means  able  to  come  up  to  a  parti- 
cipation of  God  ;  our  delivery  and  the  means  of  it,  is  ex- 
pressed, ver.  24.  Our  delivery  :  we  are  'justified  freely  by  his 
grace ;'  or  delivered  from  that  condition  and  state  of  sin, 
wherein  it  was  impossible  for  us  to  reach  and  attain  the 
glory  of  God.  The  procuring  cause  of  which  liberty  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  next  words,  Sia  Trig  awoXvTpwaEtog,  by  the  re- 
demption or  ransom  paying  that  is  in  the  blood  of  Jesus  ; 
that  is,  the  cause  of  our  deliverance  from  that  condition 
wherein  we  were  :  whence  and  how  it  is  so,  is  expressed, 
ver.  25.  God  sent  him  forth,  for  that  end,  that  we  might 
have  deliverance  through  'faith  in  his  blood,'  or  by  faith  be 
made  partakers  of  the  redemption  that  is  in  his  blood,  or 
purchased  by  it:  and  this  to  'declare  his  righteousness;'  we 
have  it  this  way,  that  the  righteousness  of  God  may  be  de- 
clared, whereto  satisfaction  is  made  by  the  death  of  Christ : 
for  that  also  is  included  in  the  word,  '  propitiation,'  as  shall 
be  afterward  proved. 

Thus  whilst  men  are  in  this  captivity,  the  wrath  of  God 
abideth  on  them ;  John  iii.  36.  and  the  full  accomplishment 
of  the  execution  of  that  wrath  is  called  the  '  wrath  to  come,' 
1  Thess.  i.  10.  which  we  are  delivered  from. 

In  this  sense  are  we  said  to  'have  redemption;'  Col. i.  14. 


152  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

in  his  blood,  or  to  have  deliverance  from  our  captivity  by 
the  price  he  paid  ;  and  by  his  death  to  be  delivered  from 
the  fear  of  death,  Heb.  ii.  15.  or  our  obnoxiousness  thereto  ; 
it  being  the  justice  or  judgment  of  God,  that  they  which 
commit  sin,  are  worthy  of  death  ;  Rom.  i.  32.  Christ  by  un- 
dergoing it  delivered  us  from  it. 

Whence  is  that  of  the  apostle;  Rom.  viii.  33,  34.  'Who 
shall  lay  any  thing  to  their  charge,  who  shall  condemn  them?' 
Who  should  but  God?  It  is  God  against  whom  they  have 
sinned,  whose  the  law  is,  and  who  alone  can  pronounce  sen- 
tence of  condemnation  on  the  offenders,  and  inflict  penalty 
accordingly.  Yea,  but  'it  is  God  that  justifies  :'  that  is,  that 
frees  men  from  their  obnoxiousness  to  punishment  for  sin 
in  the  first  sense  of  it,  which  is  their  captivity,  as  hath 
been  declared  ;  but  how  comes  this  about?  Why 'it  is  Christ 
that  died  ;'  it  is  by  the  death  of  Christ  that  we  have  this  re- 
demption. 

2.  From  all  the  miseries  that  attend  that  state  and  con- 
dition.    These  are  usually  referred  to  three  heads. 

1.  The  power  of  Satan.  2.  Of  sin.  3.  Of  the  world  : 
from  all  which  we  are  said  to  be  redeemed  ;  and  these  are 
well  compared  to  the  jailer,  filth  and  fetters  of  the  prison, 
wherein  the  captives  are  righteously  detained. 

For  the  first.  Col.  i.  13,  14.  'Who  hath  delivered  us  from 
the  power  of  darkness,  and  hath  translated  us  into  the  king- 
dom of  his  dear  Son,  in  whom  we  have  redemption  through 
his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sins.'  The  power  of  dark- 
ness, is  the  '  power  of  the  prince  of  darkness,  of  Satan  :'  this 
God  delivers  us  from,  ver.  14.  by  the '  redemption  that  is  in 
the  blood  of  Christ.'  And  how  ?  Even  as  he  who  delivers  a 
captive  from  the  judge  by  a  price,  delivers  him  also  from 
the  jailer  who  kept  him  in  prison.  By  his  death,  which  as 
hath  been  shewed,  was  a  price  and  a  ransom,  he  deprived 
Satan  of  all  his  power  over  us,  which  is  called  his  destroy- 
ing of  him;  Heb.  ii.  14.  that  is,  not  the  devil  as  to  his  essence 
and  being,  but  as  to  his  power  and  authority  over  those  who 
are  made  partakers  of  his  death. 

The  words  of  Socinus  to  this  purpose  may  be  taken  no- 
tice of.     Lib.  De  Servat.  1.  part.  2.  cap.  2. 

'^Nothing  is  wanting  in  this  deliverance,  that  it  might 

^  Nihil  in  hac  liberatione  desideratur,  ut  oinnino  verse  redemptioni  respondeat,  nisi 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST,  153 

wholly  answer  a  true  redemption,  but  only  that  he  who  de- 
tained the  captive  should  receive  the  price  :  although  it 
seems  to  some  that  it  may  be  said,  that  the  devil  received 
the  price  which  intervened  in  our  redemption,  as  the  ancient 
divines,  among  whom  was  Ambrose  and  Augustine,  made  bold 
to  speak,  yet  that  ought  to  seem  most  absurd  ;  and  it  is  true 
that  this  price  was  received  by  none.  For  on  that  account 
chiefly  is  our  deliverance  not  a  true,  but  a  metaphorical  re- 
demption, because  in  it  there  is  none  that  should  receive 
the  price.  For  if  that  which  is  in  the  place  of  a  price,  be 
received  (by  him  who  delivers  the  captive),  then  not  a  meta- 
phorical, but  a  true  price  had  intervened,  and  thereupon  our 
redemption  had  been  proper.' 

1.  It  is  confessed,  that  nothing  is  wanting  to  constitute 
that  we  speak  of  to  be  a  true,  proper,  and  real  redemption, 
but  only  that  the  price  paid,  be  received  of  him  that  deli- 
vered the  captives ;  that  this  is  God  we  proved,  that  the 
price  is  paid  to  him,  we  shall  nextly  prove. 

2.-The  only  reason  given  why  the  price  is  not  paid  to  any, 
is,  because  it  is  not  paid  to  the  devil ;  but  was  it  the  law  of 
Satan  we  had  transgressed?  Was  he  the  judge  that  cast  us 
into  prison?  Was  it  to  him  whom  we  were  indebted?  Was 
it  ever  heard  that  the  price  of  redemption  was  paid  to  the 
jailer  ?  Whether  any  of  the  ancients  said  so  or  no,  I  shall  not 
now  trouble  myself  to  inquire,  or  in  what  sense  they  said  it ; 
the  thing  in  itself  is  ridiculous  and  blasphemous. 

2.  Sin.  '  He  redeemed  us  from  all  iniquity  ;'  Tit.  ii.  14. 
and  we  were  '  redeemed  by  the  precious  blood  of  Christ  from 
our  vain  conversation  received  by  tradition  from  our  fa- 
thers;' 1  Pet.  i.  18,  19.  This  redeeming  us  from  our  sins, 
respects  two  things.  1.  The  guilt  of  them,  that  they  should 
not  condemn  us ;  and,  2.  the  power  of  them,  that  they  should 
not  rule  in  us.  In  the  place  mentioned,  it  is  the  latter  that  is 
principally  intended,  which  is  evident  from  what  was  op- 

ut  is  quicaptivum  detinebat,  pretium  accipiat :  quamvis  autem  quibusdam  videatur, 
dici  posse,  diabolum,  pretium  quod  in  nostra  liberatione  intervenit,  accepisse,  quem- 
admodura  antiquiores  Theologi,  interquos  Ambrosius,  et  Augustinus  ausi  sunt  dicere, 
tamen  id  perabsurdum  videri  debet,  et  recte  est  neminem  id  pretium  accepisse  affir- 
mare.  Ea  siquideni  ratione  potissimum,  non  vera  sed  metaphorica  redemptio,  libera 
tio  nostra  est;  quocirca  in  ea  nemo  est,  qui  pretium  accipiat,  si  enim  id  quod  in  ipso 
pretii  loco  est  acceptum  (ab  eo  scilicet  qui  captivum  liomincm  detinebat)  fuisset, 
jamnon  metaphor ic urn,  sed  verum  pretium  intervenisset,  et  propterea  vera  redcnijy 
tio  esset. 

VOL.    IX.  M 


154  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

posed  to  the  captivity  under  sia  that  is  spoken  of;  in  the 
one  place,  it  is  'purchasing  to  himself  a  peculiar  people, 
zealous  of  good  works;'  Tit.  ii.  14.  in  the  other,  'the  purify- 
ing of  our  souls  in  obedience  to  the  truth  through  the  Spi- 
rit;' ver.  22.  Now  we  are  redeemed  from  the  power  of  our 
sin,  by  the  blood  of  Christ ;  not  immediately,  but  conse- 
quentially; as  a  captive  is  delivered  from  his  fetters  and 
filth  upon  the  payment  of  his  ransom.  Christ's  satisfying 
the  justice  of  God,  reconciling  him  to  us  by  his  death,  hath 
also  procured  the  gift  of  his  Spirit  for  us,  to  deliver  us  from 
the  power  of  our  sin.  The  foundation  of  this  being  laid  in 
the  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  price  which  thereby  he  paid, 
our  delivery  from  our  sins  belongs  to  his  redemption ;  and 
we  are  therefore  said  to  be  redeemed  by  him  from  our  vain 
conversation. 

And  the  great  plea  of  our  adversary,  that  this  redemption 
is  not  proper,  because  we  are  *  redeemed  from  our  iniquities, 
and  vain  conversation,'  to  which  no  ransom  can  be  paid, 
will  then  be  freed  from  ridiculous  folly,  when  they  shall  give 
an  instance  of  a  ransom  being  paid  to  the  prisoner's  fetters 
before  his  delivery  ;  whereunto  our  sins  do  rather  answer, 
than  to  the  judge. 

2.  There  is  a  redeeming  of  us  from  the  guilt  of  sin, 
which  hath  a  twofold  expression.  1.  Of  redeeming  us  from 
the  'curse  of  the  law;' Gal.  iii.  13.  and,  2.  Of  the  'redemp- 
tion of  transgression  ;'  Heb.  ix.  15. 

For  the  first,  the  curse  of  the  law,  is  the  curse  due  to 
sin  ;  Deut.  xxvii.  29.  that  is,  to  the  transgression  of  the  law. 
This  may  be  considered  two  ways.  1.  In  respect  of  its  rise 
and  fountain,  or  its  '  terminus  a  quo  :'  2.  In  respect  of  its 
end  and  effect,  or  its  '  terminus  ad  quern.' 

For  the  first,  or  the  rise  of  it;  it  is  the  justice  of  God, 
or  the  just  and  holy  will  of  God,  requiring  punishment  for 
sin  ;  as  the  vengeance  that  is  inflicted  actually  for  sin,  is 
called  the  '  wrath  of  God;'  Rom.  i.  18.  that  is,  his  justice  and 
indignation  against  sin.  In  this  sense,  to  redeem  us  from 
the  curse  of  the  law,  is  to  make  satisfaction  to  the  justice 
of  God,  from  whence  that  curse  doth  arise,  that  it  should 
not  be  inflicted  on  us,  and  thus  it  falls  in  with  what  was  de- 
livered before,  concerning  our  captivity  by  the  justice  of 
God.     2.   As  it  is  the  penalty  itself:  so  we  are  delivered 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  155 

from  it,  by  this  ransom  paying  of  Christ,  as  the  punishment 
which  we  should  have  undergone,  had  not  he  undertaken  for 
us,  and  redeemed  us. 

2.  For  the  InroXvTpwrnq  TrapojSacrEwv,  Ileb.  ix.  15.  it  can 
be  nothing  but  making  reparation  for  the  injury  done  by 
transgression  ;  it  is  a  singular  phrase,  but  may  receive  some 
light  from  that  of  Heb.  ii.  17.  where  Christ  is  said  to  be  a 
high-priest,  u£  to  i\acni£(T^ai  Tag  a/^mpTiag  tov  Xaov,  to  recon- 
cile the  sin  of  the  people ;  that  is,  to  make  reconciliation 
for  them,  of  the  sense  whereof  afterward.  3.  He  redeems 
from  the  world  ;  Gal.  iv.  5. 

3.  The  third  thing  is,  That  this  delivei'ance  from  cap- 
tivity be  by  the  intervention  of  a  price  properly  so  called  ; 
that  Christ  did  pay  such  a  price  I  proved  before,  which  is 
the  foundation  of  this  discourse. 

The  word  XvTpov,  and  those  arising  from  thence,  were 
specially  insisted  on.  The  known  use  of  the  word  is,  're- 
demptionis  pretium  ;'  so  among  the  best  authors  of  the 
Greek  tongue  ^atvra  AajSovrtc  a^rjicav  civiv  Xurpwv,  Zenoph. 
Hallen.  7.  '  they  took  him  away  without  paying  his  ransom,' 
or  the  price  of  his  redemption;  and  dirtfixpe  to.  Awrparw  'Avvt(3a 
KOI  Tovg  aljxfxaXwTovg  ttTreXajSe :  says  Plutarch,  in  Fabius :  he 
sent  their  ransom  to  Hannibal,  and  received  the  prisoners ; 
and  from  thence  Xvrpow  is  of  the  same  import  and  significa- 
tion. So  in  the  argument  of  the  first  book  of  the  Iliads, 
speaking  of  Chrysis,  that  he  came  to  the  camp,  fiovXaiiavog 
XvTQwcra^ai  Tr)v  ^vyuTepa,  '  to  pay  a  price  for  the  redemption 
of  his  daughter.'  And  Arist.  Ethic,  lib.  ix.  cap.  2.  disput- 
ing whether  a  benefit,  or  good  turn,  be  not  to  be  repaid, 
rather  than  a  favour  done  to  any  other,  gives  an  instance  of 
a  prisoner  redeemed  ;  tw  AvrpaiS'tirt  Trapd  Xjjotwi'  ttotsoov  tov 
Xvarafxevov  avTiXvTpMTaov,  &c.  whether  he  who  is  redeemed 
by  the  payment  of  a  ransom  from  a  robber  be  to  redeem 
him  who  redeemed  him,  if  captive,  &c.  but  this  is  so  far 
confessed,  that  if  it  may  be  evinced,  that  this  price  is  paid 
to  any,  it  will  not  be  denied,  but  that  it  is  a  proper  price  of 
redemption,  as  before  was  discovered. 

That  the  death  of  Christ  is  such  a  price,  I  proved  abun- 
dantly, at  the  entrance  of  this  discourse;  it  is  so  frequently 
and  evidently  expressed  in  the  Scripture  to  be  such,  that  it 
is  not  to  be  questioned  ;  I  shall  not  farther  insist  upon  it. 

M  2 


156  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

All  that  our  adversaries  have  to  object,  is,  as  was  said, 
that  seeing  this  price  is  not  paid  to  any,  it  cannot  be  a  price 
properly  so, called,  for  as  for  the  nature  of  it,  they  confess, 
it  may  be  a  price  :  so  Socinus  acknov/ledgeth  it.     Saith  he, 

*  P  understand  the  proper  use  of  the  word  to  redeem,  to 
be,  when  a  true  price  is  given  ;  true  price  I  call  not  only 
money,  but  whatever  is  given  to  him,  that  delivers  the  cap- 
tive, to  satisfy  him,  although  many  things  in  the  redemp- 
tion be  metaphorical.' 

That  God  detains  the  captive,  hath  been  proved  ;  that 
the  price  is  paid  to  him,  though  it  be  not  silver  and  gold, 
and  that,  that  he  might  be  satisfied,  shall  be  farther  evinced. 
So  that  we  have  redemption  properly  so  called  ;  it  remains 
then  that  we  farther  manifest,  that  the  price  was  paid  to 
God. 

Although  enough  hath  been  said  already  to  evince  the 
truth  of  this,  yet  I  shall  farther  put  it  out  of  question  by 
the  ensuing  observations  and  inferences. 

1.  To  the  payment  of  a  price  or  ransom  properly  so 
called,  which  as  is  acknowledged  is  not  necessary  that  it 
should  be  money  or  the  like,  1  Pet.  i.  18.  but  any  thing  that 
may  satisfy  him  that  detains  the  captive,  it  is  not  required 
that  it  should  be  paid  into  the  hand  of  him  that  is  said  to 
receive  it ;  but  only,  that  it  be  some  such  thing  as  he  re- 
quires as  the  condition  of  releasing  the  captive.  It  may 
consist  in  personal  service,  which  is  impossible  to  be  pro- 
perly paid  into  the  hand  of  any.  For  instance  ;  if  a  father 
be  held  captive,  and  he  that  holds  him  so  requires  that  for 
the  delivery  of  his  father,  the  son  undertake  a  difficult  and 
hazardous  warfare,  wherein  he  is  concerned,  and  he  do  it 
accordingly ;  this  son  doth  properly  ransom  his  father, 
though  no  real  price  be  paid  into  the  hand  of  him  that  de- 
tained him.  It  is  sufficient  to  prove  that  this  ransom  was 
paid  by-Christ  unto  God,  if  it  be  proved,  that  upon  the  pre- 
scription of  God,  he  did  that,  and  underwent  that  which  he 
esteemed,  and  was  to  him  a  valuable  compensation,  for  the 
delivery  of  sinners, 

2.  The  propriety  of  paying  a  ransom  to  any,  where  it 

*  Propriam  enim  verbi  redimendi  significationem  intelligo,  cum  veruni  pretium  in- 
tervenit ;  vermn  autem  ,pretiiim  voco,  non  pecuniam  tantum  sed  quicquid  ut  ei  sa- 
tisfiat  qui  captivum  detinet  datur,  licet  alioqvii  multa  nietaphorica  in  ejusmodi  re- 
demptione  reperianfiir.  Socin.  dc  Serv.  lib.  1  part.  1.  cap.  1. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  157 

lies  in  undergoing  the  penalty  that  was  due  to  the  ransomed, 
coiisists  in  the  voluntary  consent  of  him  to  whom  the  ran- 
som is  paid,  and  him  that  pays  it,  unto  this  commutation  ; 
which  in  this  business  we  have  firmly  evinced.  And  the 
price  paid  by  Christ  could  be  no  other.  For  God  was  not 
our  detainer  in  captivity  as  a  sovereign  conqueror,  that  came 
upon  us  by  force  and  kept  us  prisoners,  but  as  a  just  judge 
and  lawgiver,  who  had  seized  on  us  for  our  transgressions. 
So  that  not  his  power  and  will  was  to  be  treated  withal,  but 
his  law  and  justice,  and  so  the  ransom  was  properly  paid 
to  him,  in  the  undergoing  that  penalty  which  his  justice 
required. 

3.  There  must  some  differences  be  allowed  between  spi- 
ritual, eternal,  and  civil,  corporeal,  temporal  deliverances, 
which  yet  doth  not  make  spiritual  redemption  to  be  impro- 
per ;  nay,  rather  the  other  is  said  to  be  improper  wherein  it 
agrees  not  thereunto  ;  the  one  is  spiritual,  the  other  tempo- 
ral, so  that  in  every  circumstance  it  is  not  expected  that 
they  should  agree. 

4.  There  are  two  things  distinctly  in  God  to  be  consi- 
dered in  this  business. 

1.  His  love,  his  will,  or  purpose.  2.  His  justice,  law, 
and  truth.  In  respect  of  his  love,  his  will,  his  purpose,  or 
good-pleasure,  God  himself  found  out,  appointed  and  pro- 
vided this  ransom.  The  giving  of  Christ  is  ascribed  to  his 
love,  will,  and  good  pleasure;  John  iii.  16.  Rom.  v.  8. 
viii.  32.  1  Johniv.9,  10.  as  he  had  promised  by  his  prophets 
of  old  ;  Luke  i.  67.  But  his  law  and  truth  and  justice  in 
their  several  considerations,  required  the  ransom,  and  in  re- 
spect of  them  he  accepted  it,  as  hath  been  shewed  at  large ; 
so  that  nothing  in  the  world  is  more  vain,  than  that  of  our 
adversaries  ;  that  God  procured  and  appointed  this  price, 
therefore,  he  did  not  accept  it;  that  is,  either  God's  love 
or  his  justice  must  be  denied.  Either  he  hath  no  justice 
against  sin,  or  no  love  for  sinners  ;  in  the  reconciliation  of 
which  two,  the  greatest  and  most  intense  hatred  against  sin, 
and  the  most  inexpressible  love  to  some  sinners  in  the 
blood  of  his  only  son,  lies  the  great  mystery  of  the  gospel 
which  these  men  are  unacquainted  withal. 

5.  That  God  may  be  said  to  receive  this  price,  it  was 


158  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

not  necessary  that  any  accession  should  be  made  to  his 
riches  by  the  ransom,  but  that  he  underwent  no  loss  by  our 
deliverance.  This  is  the  difference  between  a  conqueror  or 
a  tyrant  and  a  just  ruler,  in  respect  of  their  captives  and 
prisoners.  Says  the  tyrant  or  conqueror,  Pay  me  so  much 
whereby  I  may  be  enriched  or  1  will  not  part  with  my  pri- 
soner: says  the  just  ruler  and  judge.  Take  care  that  my 
justice  be  not  injured  ;  that  my  law  be  satisfied,  and  I  will 
deliver  the  prisoners.  It  is  enough  to  make  good  God's 
acceptance  of  the  price,  that  his  justice  suffered  not  by  the 
delivery  of  the  prisoner;  as  it  did  not,  Rom.  iii.  25.  yea,  it 
was  exalted  and  made  glorious  above  all  that  it  could  have 
been,  in  the  everlasting  destruction  of  the  sinner. 

These  things  being  thus  premised,  it  will  not  be  difficult 
to  establish  the  truth  asserted  ;  namely,  that  this  price  or 
ransom  was  paid  to  God.     For, 

1.  A  price  of  redemption,  a  ransom  must  be  paid  to 
some  or  other;  the  nature  of  the  thing  requires  it.  That 
the  death  of  Christ  was  a  price  or  ransom,  properly  so  called, 
hath  been  shewed  before;  the  ridiculous  objection,  that  then 
it  must  be  paid  to  Satan  or  our  sin,  hath  also  been  suffi- 
ciently removed,  so  that  God  alone  remains  to  whom  it  is  to 
be  paid.  For  unless  to  some  it  is  paid,  it  is  not  a  price  or 
ransom. 

2.  The  price  of  redemption  is  to  be  paid  to  him  who  de- 
tains the  captive  by  way  of  jurisdiction,  right,  and  law 
power.  That  God  is  he  who  thus  detained  the  captive,  was 
also  proved  before.  He  is  the  great  householder  that  calls 
his  servants  that  do,  or  should  serve  him,  to  an  account ; 
Matt,  xviii.  23,  24.  awapaL  \6yov'  and  wicked  men  are 
KUTapag  TiKva,  2  Pet.  ii.  14.  the  children  of  his  curse,  obnoxi- 
ous to  it.  It  is  his  judgment  that  they  which  commit  sin 
are  worthy  of  death  ;  Rom.  i.  32.  and  Christ  is  a  propitia- 
tion to  'declare  his  righteousness  ;'  Rom.  iii.  25.  And  it  is 
his  wrath  from  whence  we  are  delivered  by  this  ransom ;  Rom. 
ii.  5.  1  Thess.  i.  10.  the  law  was  his  to  which  Christ  was 
made  obnoxious  ;  Gal.  iv.  4.  the  curse  his  which  he  was  made; 
chap.  iii.  13.  it  was  his  will  he  came  to  do  and  suffer;  Heb. 
X.  5.  it  was  his  will  that  he  should  drink  off  the  cup  of  his 
passion  ;  Matt.  xxvi.  it  pleased  him  to  bruise  him  :  Isa.  liii. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  159 

he  made  all  our  iniquities  to  meet  upon  him;  ver.  6.  so 
that  doubtless  this  ransom  was  paid  to  him  ;  we  intend  no 
more  by  it  than  what  in  those  places  is  expressed. 

3.  This  ransom  was  also  a  sacrifice,  as  hath  been  de- 
clared. Look  then  to  whom  the  sacrifice  was  offered,  to  him 
the  ransom  was  paid.  These  are  but  several  notions  of  the 
same  thing.  Now  the  sacrifice  he  offered  to  God ;  Eph.  v.  2. 
to  him  then  also,  and  only,  was  this  ransom  paid. 

4.  Christ  paid  this  ransom  as  he  was  a  mediator  and 
surety :  now  he  was  the  Mediator  between  God  and  man, 
and  therefore  he  must  pay  this  price  to  one  of  them,  either 
God  or  man  and  it  is  not  difiicult  to  determine  whether  :  1 
Tim.  ii.  5,  6.  gives  us  this  fully.  He  is  the  Mediator,  and 
as  such  he  gave  himself  dvTiXvTpov,  a  price  of  redemption 
to  God. 

From  this  description  of  redemption  properly  so  called, 
and  the  application  of  it  to  the  redemption  made  by  Jesus 
Christ,  we  thus  argue  : 

He  who  by  his  own  blood  and  death  paid  the  price  of 
our  redemption  to  God,  in  that  he  underwent  what  was  due 
to  us,  and  procured  our  liberty  and  deliverance  thereby,  he 
made  satisfaction  properly  for  our  sins  ;  but  when  we  were 
captives  for  sin  to  the  justice  of  God,  and  committed  thereon 
to  the  power  of  sin  and  Satan,  Christ  by  his  death  and  blood 
paid  the  price  of  our  redemption  to  God,  and  procured  our 
deliverance  thereby  :  therefore  he  made  satisfaction  to  God 
for  our  sins. 

For  the  farther  confirmation  of  what  hath  been  delivered, 
some  few  of  the  most  eminent  testimonies  given  to  this  truth, 
are  to  be  explained  and  vindicated,  wherewith  I  shall  close 
this  discourse  of  our  redemption  by  Christ.  Out  of  the  very 
many  that  may  be  insisted  on,  I  shall  choose  out  only  those 
that  follow. 

1.  Rom.  iii.  24,  25.  '  Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace, 
through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Jesus  Christ ;  whom  God 
hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood, 
to  declare  his  righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins  that 
are  past,  through  the  forbearance  of  God.'  Redemption  in 
itself,  in  its  effect,  in  respect  of  us,  with  all  its  causes  is  here 
expressed.  Its  effect  in  respect  of  us,  is,  that  we  are  justified 


160  OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST, 

freely :  StKatou/xevoi  ^opedv,  not  brought  easily,  and  with  little 
labour  to  be  righteous  or  honest,  as  some  vainly  imagine 
(Grot,  in  locum),  but  accepted  freely  with  God,  without 
the  performance  of  the  works  of  the  law,  whereby  the  Jews 
sought  after  righteousness.  2.  The  end  on  the  part  of  God, 
is,  the  declaration  of  his  righteousness.  3.  The  means  pro- 
curing this  end  is,  the  blood  of  Christ :  redemption  by 
Christ,  and  in  his  blood. 

4.  The  means  of  communicating  this  effect  on  the  part 
of  God,  is  the  setting  forth  Christ  a  propitiation  :  on  our 
part,  as  to  application,  it  is  '  faith  in  his  blood.' 

As  to  the  effect  of  our  justification,  it  shall  afterward  be 
considered.  The  manner,  or  rise  of  it  rather  (for  both  may 
be  denoted)  on  the  part  of  God,  is  doptdv,  that  is,  freely  :  or 
as  it  is  expounded  in  the  next  words,  t7j  avTov  xdpiTi,  '  by  his 
grace.'  Our  redemption  and  the  effects  of  it  are  free  ;'  1.  On 
the  part  of  God,  in  respect  of  his  purpose  and  decree,  which 
is  called  iKkofr]  xapirbg  ;  Rom.  xi.  5.  His  great  design,  and 
contrivance  of  the  work  of  our  salvation  and  deliverance. 
This  he  did  *  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will,  to 
the  praise  of  the  glory  of  his  grace  ;'  Eph.  i.  5,  6,  according 
*  to  his  good  pleasure  which  he  had  purposed  in  himself,' 
ver.  9.  according  '  to  the  purpose  of  him  who  worketh  all 
things  after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will ;'  ver.  11,  And  it  is 
free  in  regard  of  the  love,  from  whence  Christ  was  sent,  John 
iii.  16.  which  also  is  ascribed  rp  X"P'^'  3"f ow ;  Heb.  ii.  9.  and 
it  is  free  in  respect  of  us  :  we  do  not  obtain  it  by  the  works 
of  the  law,  Rom.  iv.  6.  neither  can  it  be  so  attained,  nor  is 
that  required  of  us ;  and  free  on  our  part,  in  that  nothing  of 
us  is  required  in  way  of  satisfaction,  recompense,  or  ran- 
som. '  He  spared  not  his  Son,  but  with  him  freely  gives  us 
all  things;'  Rom.  viii.  diKaiovfievoi  dopmv,  we  are  justified 
freely,  that  is,  we  are  delivered  from  our  bondage  without 
any  satisfaction  made  by  us,  or  works  performed  by  us,  to 
attain  it,  God  having  freely  designed  this  way  of  salvation, 
and  sent  Jesus  Christ  to  do  this  work  for  us. 

'  Ad  justitiam  vero  perducuntur  etiam  sine  labore  qui  ad 
minores  virtutes,  id  est,  philosophicas  requiri  solet  fides 
enim  ejus  laboris  compendium  facit.'  rwv  ttovwv  TrwXovmv, 
niXiv  wavra  t   ayaSr'  ot  0£Ot.   Grot.  in  loc. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  IGl 

'  They  are  brought  to  righteousness,  without  that  labour 
that  is  required  for  lesser,  even  philosophical  virtues.  Faith 
makes  an  abridgement  of  the  work.' 

The  irpwTov  xpevdog  of  the  great  man,  in  the  whole  inter- 
pretation of  that  epistle,  as  of  others  of  sundry  sorts  besides 
himself,  is,  that  to  be  justified, is  to  be  brought  to  righteous- 
ness by  the  practice  of  virtue  and  honesty  (which  answers 
to  that  the  Scripture  calls  sanctification)  with  as  gross  a 
shutting  out  of  light,  as  can  befall  any  man  in  the  world. 
This,  with  that  notion  which  he  hath  of  faith,  is  the  bottom 
of  this  interpretation.     But, 

2.  Let  him  tell  us  freely,  what  instance  he  can  give  of 
this  use  of  the  word  Sopeav,  which  here  he  imposeth  on  us ; 
that  it  should  signify  the  facility  of  doing  a  thing.  And 
withal,  whether  these  words  StKatou/xEvot  Soptav,  denote  an 
act  of  God,  or  of  them  that  are  justified  ?  Whether  being- 
justified  freely  by  his  grace,  be  his  free  justifying  of  us,  as  to 
what  is  actively  denoted,  or  our  easy  performance  of  the 
works  of  righteousness  ?  That  dopeav,  in  this  place,  should 
relate  to  our  duties,  and  signify  easily  ;  and  not  to  the  act 
of  God  accepting  us,  and  import  freely,  is  such  a  violence 
offered  to  the  Scripture,  as  nothing  could  have  compelled 
the  learned  man  to  venture  on,  but  pure  necessity  of  main- 
taining the  Socinian  justification. 

3.  For  the  philosophical  virtues,  which  the  gods  sold  for 
labour,  they  were  '  splendida  peccata,'  and  no  more. 

As  to  the  part  of  the  words,  Socinus  himself  was  not  so 
far  out  of  the  way,  as  the  annotator ;  saith  he,  *  Justificati 
gratis,  sensus  est,  partam  nobis  esse  peccatorum  nostrorum 
absolutionem(id  enim  ut  scis  quod  ad  nos  attinetreipsajus- 
tificari  est)  non  quidem  per  legis  opera,  quibus  illam  com- 
meriti  sumus,  sed  gratis  per  gratiam  Dei.'  De  Servat.  lib.  1. 
part.  2.  cap.  2. 

2.  The  end  on  the  part  of  God,  is  IvddZig  SiKaioavvtic,  'the 
declaration  of  his  righteousness;'  StKaiocrvi'ij,  is  properly  God's 
justice  as  he  is  a  judge.  It  is  true  IDtl  is  often  rendered  by 
the  seventy  Sdcatoo-ui'jj,  and  by  us  from  thence,  '  righteous- 
ness;'which  signifies  indeed  benignity,  kindness,  and  good- 
ness :  and  so  T^\>1'<£  which  is  '  righteousness,'  is  rendered  by 
them  sometimes  aXeog  '  mercy,'  and  the  circumstances  of  the 
place  may  sometimes  require  that  signification  of  the  word; 


162  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

but  firstly  and  properly,  it  is  that  property  of  God,  whereby 
as  a  judge,  he  renders  to  every  one  according  to  their  ways 
before  him,  rewarding  those  that  obey  him,  and  punishing 
transgressions.  This  I  have^  elsewhere  declared  at  large. 
Hence  he  is.  pDi  iDDlli?  Psal.  ix.  4.  which  as  Paul  speaks, 
2  Tim.  iv.  8.  is,  6  oiicatoc  Kpmjg,  the  'righteous judge,' so  Rom. 
i.32.  2  Thess.  i.  6.  Rev.  xv.  4.  so  Isa.  lix.  16.  'And  he  saw 
that  there  was  no  man,  and  wondered  that  there  was  no  in- 
tercessor, therefore  his  arm  brought  salvation  unto  him,  and 
his  righteousness  it  sustained  him.'  His  righteousness  sus- 
tained him  in  executing  vengeance  on  the  enemies  of  his 
church.  This  is  the  righteousness  that  God  aimed  to  ma- 
nifest, and  to  declare  in  our  redemption  by  Christ :  that  he 
might  be  just,  as  the  words  follow  ;  namely,  that  he  might 
be  known  to  be  just  and  righteous,  in  taking  such  sore  ven- 
geance of  sin,  in  the  flesh  of  Jesus  Christ  his  Son ;  Rom. 
viii.  3.  Hence  did  God  appear  to  be  exceeding  righteous, 
of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity.  He  declared  to  all 
the  world,  what  was  due  to  sin,  and  what  must  be  expected 
by  men,  if  they  are  not  partakers  of  the  redemption  which  is 
in  the  blood  of  Jesus  Christ;   Rom.  viii.  3. 

Grotius  would  have  diKaioavvri  here  to  signify  '  goodness' 
and  *  bounty ;'  which,  as  we  deny  not,  but  that  in  some  places 
in  the  Old  Testament  where  it  is  used  by  the  LXX,  it  doth, 
or  may  do;  so  we  say  here,  that  sense  can  have  no  place, 
which  nowhere  is  direct  and  proper:  for  the  thing  intended 
by  it  in  that  sense,  is  expressed  before  in  those  words  Soptav 
ryxapiTi  avrov,  and  is  not  consistent  with  that,  that  follows, 
tig  TO  HTai  avTov  ^iKaiov,  which  represents  God,  as  he  is, 
^iKaiog  KjOtrjjCj  as  was  spoken  before. 

Socinus  goes  another  way :  says  he,  '  In  Christo,  Deus 
ut  ostenderet  se  veracem  et  fidelem  esse,  quod  significant 
verba  ilia,  justitise  suae,'  &,c.  Referring  it  to  God's  righ- 
teousness of  verity  and  fidelity,  in  fulfilling  his  promise  of 
forgiveness  of  sins.  But,  says  Grotius,  righteousness  can- 
not be  here  interpreted,  '  de  fide  in  promissis  prjEStandis, 
quia  hsec  verba  pertinent  non  ad  Judseos  tantum,  sed  ad 
Gentes  etiam,  quibus  nulla  promissio  facta  est.'  '  Because 
Gentiles  are  spoken  of,  and  not  the  Jews  only,  but  to 
them  there  was  no  promise  given.'    A  reason  worthy  the  an- 

.  f  Diatrib.  de  Justit.  Div. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST.  163 

notations  ;  as  though  tlie  promise  was  not  made  to  Abraham, 
that  he  should  be  heir  of  the  world,  and  to  all  his  seed,  not 
only  according  to  the  flesh  ;  and  as  though  the  learned  man 
himself  did  not  think  the  first  promise  to  have  been  made, 
and  always  to  have  belonged  to  all  and  every  man  in  the 
world.  But  yet  neither  will  the  sense  of  Socinus  stand,  for 
the  reasons  before  given. 

But  how  are  these  ends  brought  about,  that  we  should 
be  SiKaiovjutyGi  SopEo'v  ;  and  yet  there  should  be,  Ivdd^ig  St- 
Kaio(Tvvi]g  ? 

3.  Ans.  The  means  procuring  all  this,  is  the  blood  of 
Christ;  it  is,  Bia  rrig  cnroXvTpwa^ijjg  Trjg  er  ^piario  'Ljcou,  *by 
the  redemption  that  is  in  Jesus  Christ;'  and  how  that  re- 
demption is  wrought,  he  expresseth,  when  he  shews  how  we 
are  made  partakers  of  it,  Sm  Tr\Q  Triarewg  Iv  rw  avTov  al/xari, 
'  through  faith  in  his  blood.'  The  redemption  wrought  and 
procured  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  is  the  procuring  cause  of 
all  this.  The  causa  irQor^yovjjiivrh  is  the  grace  of  God,  of 
which  before ;  the  causa  irpoKarapKriKri,  is  this  blood  of  Christ ; 
this  redemption,  as  here,  is  called  cnroXvrpojmg,  Luke  xxi.  28. 
Eph.  i.  7.  Col.  i.  14.  XvTpojaig,  Luke  i.  68.  John  ii.  38.  Heb.  ix. 
12.  Xvrpov,  Matt.  XX.  28.x.  45.  dvTiXvrpov,  1  Tim.  ii.  6.  and 
in  respect  of  the  effect,  pxxjig  Rom.  iv.  24.  xi.  26.  Col.  i.  13. 
1  Thess.  i.  10.  This  is  the  procuring  cause,  as  I  said,  of  the 
whole  effect  of  God's  free  grace  here  mentioned  ;  we  are  jus- 
tified freely,  because  we  have  redemption  by  the  blood  of 
Christ,  he  obtained  it  for  us  by  the  price  of  his  blood. 

I  rather  abide  on  the  former  sense  of  Avrpov  (from  whence 
is  aTToXvTpdyaig^  to  be  a  price  of  redemption,  than  to  inter- 
pret it  by  'lustrum,'  and  so  to  refer  it  to  the  sacrifices  of  pu- 
rification, which  belong  to  another  consideration  of  the  death 
of  Christ;  and  yet  the  consideration  of  the  blood  of  Christ, 
as  a  sacrifice,  hath  place  here  also,  as  shall  be  discovered. 
This  is  that  which  is  here  asserted  ;  we  have  forgiveness  of 
sins  >by  the  intervention  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  obtaining 
redemption  for  us,  which  is  that  we  aim  to  prove  from  this 
place. 

Grotius  gives  this  exposition  of  the  words.  '  Christus 
per  obedientiam  suam  (maxime  in  morte)  et  preces  ei  acce- 
dentes,  hoc  a  patre  obtinuit,  ne  is  humanum  genus  gravibus 
peccatis  inimersum  desereret,  atque  obduraret;   sed  viam 


164  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

illis  daret  ad  justitiam  perveniendi  per  Christum  :  etlibera- 
ret,  nempe  a  necessitate  moriendi  in  peccatis,  viam  patefa- 
ciendo  per  quam  exire  ista  liceret.'  *  Christ  by  his  obe- 
dience (especially  in  his  death)  and  the  prayers  accompany- 
ing it,  obtained  this  of  his  Father,  that  he  should  not  forsake 
and  harden  mankind,  drenched  in  grievous  sins,  but  should 
give  them  away  of  coming  to  righteousness  by  Jesus  Christ, 
and  should  deliver  them  from  a  necessity  of  dying  in  their 
sin,  by  revealing  a  way  whereby  they  might  escape  it.' 

1.  It  is  well  it  is  granted,  that  the  death  of  Christ  re- 
spected God  in  the  first  place,  and  the  obtaining  somewhat 
of  him,  which  the  annotator's  friends  deny. 

2.  That  the  purchase  of  Christ  was  not  for  all  mankind, 
that  they  might  be  delivered,  but  for  the  elect,  that  they 
should  be  delivered,  has  elsewhere  been  declared. 

3.  Christ  by  his  death,  did  not  obtain  of  his  Father,  that 
he  should  reveal  or  appoint  that  way  of  obtaining  deliver- 
ance and  salvation,  which  by  him  we  have.  This,  as  the 
giving  of  Christ  himself,  was  of  the  free  grace  and  love  of 
God ;  nor  is  the  appointment  of  the  way  of  salvation,  ac- 
cording to  the  covenant  of  grace,  any  where  assigned  to  the 
death  of  Christ ;  but  to  the  love  of  God,  sending  his  Son, 
and  appointing  him  to  be  a  mediator;  though  the  good 
things  of  the  covenant  be  purchased  by  him. 

4.  This  is  all  the  effect  here  assigned  to  the  bloodshed- 
ding  of  Jesus  Christ;  this  is  the  redemption  we  have  there- 
by. '  He  obtained  of  his  Father,  that  a  better  way  of  com- 
ing to  righteousness,  than  that  of  the  law,  or  that  of  philo- 
sophy, might  by  declared  to  us.'  The  mystery  of  the  whole 
is;  Christ  by  his  obedience  to  God,  obtained  this,  that  him- 
self should  be  exalted  to  give  a  new  law,  and  teach  a  new 

doctrine,  in  obedience  whereunto  we  misrht  come  to  be  rio-h- 

o 

teous  :  which  must  needs  be  an  excellent  explication  of 
these  words,  '  we  have  redemption  by  his  blood  ;'  which 
plainly  express  the  price  he  paid  for  us,  and  the  effect  that 
ensued  thereon. 

Socinus  goes  another  way  :  says  he, 

'Thes  intervention   of  the  blood   of  Christ,   though  it 

8  Inlerventus  sanguinis  Christi,  licet  Deiim  ad  liberationem  lianc  a  peccatoniiu 
nostroruin  poena  nobis  concedendum  movere  nou  potuerit,  iiiovit  lamen  nos  ad  earn 
nobis  oblatatn  accipiendam,  ct  Cliristo  fidem  liabcndam,  Socin,  iibi  sup. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRFST.  1C5 

moved  not  God  to  grant  us  deliverance  from  the  punishment 
of  sin,  yet  it  moved  us  to  accept  of  it  being  offered,  and  to 
believe  in  Christ.' 

That  is  ;  the  blood  of  Christ,  being  paid  as  a  price  of  our 
redemption,  hath  no  effect  in  respect  of  him  to  whom  it  is 
paid,  but  only  in  respect  of  them  for  w^hom  it  is  paid  ;  than 
which  imagination  nothing  can  be  more  ridiculous. 

4.  The  means  of  application  of  the  redemption  menti- 
tioned,  or  participation  in  respect  of  us,  is  faith :  It  is  Sm 
TTicFTiwg  Iv  ainari  avTov,  of  this  we  have  no  occasion  to  speak. 

5.  The  means  of  communication  on  the  part  of  God,  is 
in  these  words,  ov  TrpotS'ero  6  ^eoq  IXaarnpiov;  'whom  God 
hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation.'  God  set  him  forth  for 
this  end  and  purpose  ;  the  word  irpoi^eTo,  may  design  various 
acts  of  God  :  As, 

1.  His  purpose  and  determination,  or  decree  of  giving 
Christ ;  whence  our  translators  have  in  the  margin  rendered 
it  'fore-ordained,'  as  the  word  is  used,  Eph.  i.  9.  t/v  irpoe^iro 
Iv  avTto,  'which  he  fore-purposed  in  himself.'    Or, 

2.  God's  proposal  of  him  before-hand,  in  types  and  sa- 
crifices to  the  Jews ;  the  preposition  ttjOo  being  often  in  com- 
position used  in  that  sense  in  this  epistle,  chap,  iii.9.  xi.  35. 
XV.  4.    Or, 

3.  For  the  actual  exhibition  of  him  in  the  flesh,  when 
God  sent  him  into  the  world.    Or, 

4.  It  may  refer  to  the  open  exposition  and  publication  of 
,him  in  the  world  by  the  gospel ;  for  as  we  shall  afterward 
shew,  the  ensuing  words  hold  out  an  allusion  to  the  ark, 
which  now  in  Christ  the  veil  being  rent,  is  exposed  to  the 
open  view  of  believers  :  hence  John  tells  us.  Rev.  xi.  19. 
when  the  temple  was  opened,  'there  was  seen  in  it  the  ark 
of  the  testament ;'  which,  as  it  was  not  at  all  in  the  second 
temple,  the  true  ark  being  to  be  brought  in,  no  more  was  it 
to  be  seen  upon  the  opening  of  the  temple  in  the  first,  where 
it  was,  being  closed  in  the  Holiest  of  Holies  ;  but  now  in 
the  ordinances  of  the  gospel,  the  ark  is  perspicuous ;  be- 
cause ^eog  TTpoi^tTo,  God  hath  set  it  forth  to  believers. 

Now  he  was  set  forth  iXaariipiov,  '  a  propitiation.'  There 
is  none  but  have  observed,  that  this  is  the  name  of  the  co- 
vering of  the  ark,  or  the  mercy-seat,  that  is  applied  to  Christ; 
Heb.  ix.  5.  but  the  true  reason  and  sense  of  it  hath  scarce 


166  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

been  observed  ;  ours  generally  would  prove  from  hence,  that 
Christ  did  propitiate  God  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself,  that 
may  have  something  from  the  general  notice  of  the  word,  re- 
,  ferred  to  the  *  sacrificia'  iXaaTiKu  (whereof  afterward)  but  not 
from  the  particular  intimated.  The  mercy-seat  did  not  atone 
God  for  the  sins  that  were  committed  against  the  law  that 
was  in  the  ark,  but  declared  him  to  be  atoned  and  appeased. 
That  this  is  the  meaning  of  it,  that,  as  the  mercy-seat  de- 
clared God  to  be  atoned,  so  also  is  Christ  set  forth  to  declare, 
that  God  was  atoned,  not  to  atone  him,  Socinus  contends  at 
large,  but  to  the  utter  confusion  of  his  cause.     For, 

1.  If  this  declares  God  to  be  '  pacatus,'  and  'placatus,' 
then  God  was  provoked,  and  some  way  was  used  for  his 
atonement.    And, 

2.  This  is  indeed  the  true  import  of  that  type,  and  the 
application  of  it  here  by  our  apostle.  The  mercy-seat  de- 
clared God  to  be  appeased  ;  but  how  ?  By  the  blood  of 
the  sacrifice  that  was  offered  without,  and  brought  into  the 
holy  place;  the  high-priest  never  went  into  that  place,  about 
the  worship  of  God,  but  it  was  with  the  blood  of  that  sa- 
crifice, which  was  expressly  appointed  to  make  atonement ; 
Lev.  xvi.  God  would  not  have  the  mercy-seat  once  seen,  nor 
any  pledge  of  his  being  atoned,  but  by  the  blood  of  the  pro- 
pitiatory sacrifice.  So  it  is  here  ;  God  sets  out  Jesus  Christ 
as  a  propitiation ;  declares  himself  to  be  appeased  and  're- 
conciled ;  but  how?  by  the  blood  of  Christ ;  by  the  sacrifice 
of  himself;  by  the  price  of  redemption  which  he  paid.  This 
is  the  intendment  of  the  apostle  ;  Christ  by  his  blood,  and 
the  price  he  paid  thereby,  with  the  sacrifice  he  made,  hav- 
ing atoned  God,  or  made  atonement  with  him  for  us,  God 
now  sets  him  forth,  the  veil  of  the  temple  being  rent,  to  the 
eye  of  all  believers,  as  the  mercy-seat  wherein  we  may  see 
God  fully  reconciled  to  us.  And  this  may  serve  for  the  vin- 
dication of  the  testimony  to  the  truth  insisted  on  ;  and  this 
is  the  same  with  2  Cor.  iii.  17. 

It  would  be  too  long  for  me  to  insist  in  particular,  on  the 
full  vindication  of  the  other  testimonies,  that  are  used  for 
the  confirmation  of  this  truth.  I  shall  give  them  therefore 
together  in  such  a  way,  as  that  their  efiicacay  to  the  pur- 
pose in  hand,  may  be  easily  discerned. 

1 .  We  are  bought  by  Christ,  saith  the  apostle  ;  riyopa(T^r}T£, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  167 

'  ye  are  bought,'  1  Cor.  vi.  20.  but  this  buying  may  be  taken 
metaphorically  for  a  mere  deliverance,  as  certainly  it  is,  2  Pet. 
ii.  1.  denying  the  Lord  that  bought  them:  i.  e.  delivered 
them,  for  it  is  spoken  of  God  the  Father.    It  may  be  so,  the 
word  may  be  so  used,  and  therefore  to  shew  the  propriety  of 
it  here,  the  apostle  adds  rrig  Tt/xfjc, '  with  a  price ;  ye  are  bought 
with  a  price.     To  be  bought  with  a  price,  doth  nowhere  sig- 
nify to  be  barely  delivered,  but  to  be  delivered  with  a  valu- 
able compensation   for  our    deliverance ;  but  what  is  this 
price  wherewith  we  are  bought?     1  Pet.  i.  18.  'Not  with 
silver  or  gold,' but  tijiuo  cufxaTL  xpkttov  ;  with  the  'precious 
honourable  blood  of  Christ:'  why  rifiiov  alfxa,  'the  precious 
blood?'  That  we  may  know,  that  in  this  business  it  was  va- 
lued at  a  sufficient  rate  for  our  redemption ;   and  it  did  that, 
which  in  temporal  civil  redemption  is  done  by  silver  and 
gold,  which  are  given,  as  a  valuable  consideration  for  the 
captive.     But  what  kind  of  price  is  this  blood  of  Christ?  It 
is  Xwrpov  Matt.  XX.  28.  that  is,  a  price  of  redemption;  whence 
it  is  said,  that '  he  gave  himself  for  us ;'  tva  XvrpuxrriTat  v^ag. 
Tit.  ii.  14.  that  he  might  'fetch  us  off  with  a  ransom  :'  but  it 
may  be  that  it  is  called  Xvrpov,  not  that  he  put  himself  in  our 
stead,  and  underwent  what  was  due  to  us  ;  but  that  his  death 
was  as  it  were  a  price,  because  thereon  we  were  delivered. 
Nay,  but  his  life  was  Xvrpov  properly,  and  therefore  he  calls 
it  also  iivTiXvTpov,  1  Tim.  ii.  6.  avrl  in  composition  signifies 
either  opposition,  as  1  Pet.  ii.  25.  or  substitution  and  com- 
mutation, Matt.  ii.  22.  in  the  first  sense,  here  it  cannot  be 
taken,  therefore  it  must  be  in  the  latter;  he  was  avTiXvrpnv: 
that  is,  did  so  pay  a  ransom,  that  he  himself  became   that 
which  we  should  have  been,  as  it  is  expressed.  Gal.  iii.  13. 
He  'redeemed  us  from  the  curse,  being  made  a  curse  for  us:' 
to  whom  he  paid  this  price  was  before  declared,  and  the  apo- 
stle expresseth  it,  Eph.  v.  2.    What  now  is  the  issue  of  all 
this?  we  have  redemption  thereby  ;  i.  7.  'In  whom  we  have 
aTToXvTpojatv  dia.  tov  aifiaTog  avTov,  redemption  by  his  blood  ;' 
as  it  is  again  asserted  in  the  same  words.  Col.  i.  14.  But  how 
came  we  by  this  redemption  ?  He  obtained  it  of  God  for  us, 
he  entered  into  heaven,  alwviav  Xvrpiomv  ivpufxtvog,  having 
'found,  or  obtained  everlasting  redemption  for  us  ;'  by  the 
price  of  his  blood  he  procured  this  deliverance  at  the  hand 
of  God.     And  that  we  may  know  that  this  effect  of  the  death 


168  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

of  Christ  is  properly  towards  God,  what  the  immediate  issue 
of  this  redemption  is,  is  expressed.  It  is  '  forgiveness  of 
sins;'  Eph.  i.  7.  Col.  i.  13.  Rom.  iii.  24,  25. 

And  this  is  as  much  as  is  needful  to  the  first  notion  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  as  a  price  and  ransom,  with  the  issues 
of  it,  and  the  confirmation  of  our  first  argument  from  thence 
for  the  satisfaction  of  Christ. 


CHAP.  XXIX. 

Of  reconciliation  hy  the  death  of  Christ  as  it  is  a  sacrifce. 

The  next  consideration  of  the  death  of  Christ,  is  of  it  as  a 
sacrifice ;  and  the  proper  effect  thereof  is  reconciliation  by 
his  death  as  a  sacrifice. 

1.  Reconciliation  in  general,  is  the  renewal  of  lost  friend- 
ship and  peace  between  persons  at  variance.  To  apply  this 
to  the  matter  treated  of,  the  ensuing  positions  are  to  be  pre- 
mised. 

1 .  There  was  at  first  in  the  state  of  innocency,  friend- 
ship arjd  peace  between  God  and  man.  God  had  no  enmity 
against  his  creature  :  he  approved  him  to  be  good  :  and  ap- 
pointed him  to  walk  in  peace,  communion,  confidence,  and 
boldness  with  him  ;  Gen.  iii.  Nor  had  man,  on  whose  heart 
the  law  and  love  of  his  Maker  was  written,  any  enmity  against 
his  Creator,  God,  and  rewarder. 

2.  That  by  sin  there  is  division,  separation  and  breach 
of  peace  and  friendship  introduced  between  God  and  the 
creature  ;  Isa.  lix.  2.  '  Your  iniquities  have  separated  be- 
tween you  and  your  God,  and  your  sins,  have  hid  his  face 
from  you;'  Isa.  Ixiii.  10.  'They  rebelled  against  him,  there- 
fore he  was  turned  to  be  their  enemy  and  fought  against 
them.'  '  There  is  no  peace  to  the  wicked,  saith  my  God;'  Isa. 
xlviii.  22.  and  therefore  it  is  that  upon  a  delivery  from  this 
condition  we  are  said  (and  not  before)  to  'have  peace  with 
God  ;'  Rom.  v.  1. 

3.  That  by  this  breach  of  peace  and  friendship  with  God, 
God  was  alienated  from  the  sinner,  so  as  to  be  angry  with 
him,  and  to  renounce  all  peace  and  friendship  with  him,  con- 
sidered as  such,  and  in  that  condition.  '  He  that  believeth  not. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  169 

the  wrath  of  God  abides  on  him  ;'  John  iii.  36,  And  there- 
fore by  nature,  and  in  our  natural  condition,  we  are  '  chil- 
dren of  wrath;'  Eph.  ii.  3.  that  is,  obnoxious  to  the  wrath 
of  God,  that  abides  upon  unbelievers;  that  is,  unreconciled 
persons. 

4.  This  enmity  on  the  part  of  God,  consists 

1.  In  the  purity  and  holiness  of  his  nature,  whence  he 
cannot  admit  a  guilty  defiled  creature  to  have  any  commu- 
nion with  him  ;  he  is  a  God  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  ini- 
quity ;  Heb.  i.  13,  And  sinners  cannot  serve  him  because 
he  is  a  'holy  God,  a  jealous  God,  that  will  not  forgive  their 
transgressions  nor  their  sins;'  Josh.  xxiv.  19. 

2.  In  his  will  of  punishing  for  sin,  Rom.  i.  32.  *  It  is  the 
judgment  of  God,  that  they  which  commit  sin  are  worthy 
of  death;'  and  this  from  the  righteousness  of  the  thing  it- 
self; 2  Thess.  i.  6.  '  It  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  re- 
compense tribulations  to  sinners  :  he  is  not  a  God  that  hath 
pleasure  in  iniquity  ;'  Psal.  v.  4 — 6. 

3.  In  the  sentence  of  his  law,  in  the  establishing  and 
execution  whereof  his  truth  and  honour  were  engaged;  '  In 
the  day  thou  eatest  thou  shaltdie  ;'  Gen.  ii.  17.  *  And  cursed 
is  every  one  thatcontinueth  not,'  &c.  Deut.  xxvii.  29.  And 
of  this  enmity  of  God  against  sin  and  sinners,  as  I  have 
elsewhere  at  large  declared,  there  is  an  indelible  persuasion 
abiding  on  the  hearts  of  all  the  sons  of  men,  however  by  the 
stirrings  of  lust  and  craft  of  Satan,  it  may  be  more  or  less 
blotted  in  them.     Hence, 

4.  As  a  fruit  and  evidence  of  this  enmity,  God  abomi- 
nates their  persons,  Psal.  i.  4  —  6.  rejects  and  hates  their 
duties  and  ways,  Prov.  xv.  8,  9.  and  prepares  wrath  and 
vengeance  for  them  to  be  inflicted  in  his  appointed  time  ; 
Horn.  ii.  5.  All  which  make  up  perfect  enmity  on  the  part 
of  God. 

2.  That  man  was  at  enmity  with  God  as  on  his  part,  1 
shall  not  need  to  prove ;  because  I  am  not  treating  of  our 
reconciliation  to  God,  but  of  his  reconciliation  to  us. 

5.  Where  there  is  such  an  enmity  as  this,  begun  by  of- 
fence on  the  one  part,  and  continued  by  anger  and  purpose 
to  punish  on  the  other,  to  make  reconciliation  is  properly  to 
propitiate,  and  turn  away  the  anger  of  the  person  offended, 
and   thereby   to  bring  the   offender   into    favour  with  him 

VOL.    IX.  N 


170  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

again,  and  to  an  enjoyment  of  the  same,  or  a  friendship  built 
on  better  conditions  than  the  former.  This  description  of 
reconciliation  doth  God  himself  give  us.  Job  xlii.  7 — 9. 
*  And  it  was  so,  that  after  the  Lord  had  spoken  these  words 
unto  Job,  the  Lord  said  unto  Eliphaz  the  Temanite,  My 
wrath  is  kindled  against  thee,  and  against  thy  two  friends  : 
for  ye  have  not  spoken  of  me  the  thing  that  is  right,  as  my 
servant  Job  hath.  Therefore  take  unto  you  now  seven  bul- 
locks and  seven  rams,  and  go  to  my  servant  Job,  and  offer 
up  for  yourselves  a  burnt-offering,  and  my  servant  Job  shall 
pray  for  you,  for  him  will  I  accept,  lest  I  deal  with  you  af- 
ter your  folly,  in  that  you  have  not  spoken  of  me  the  thing 
that  is  right,  like  my  servant  Job,'  &c.  The  offenders  are 
Eliphaz  and  his  two  friends  ;  the  offence  is  their  folly  in 
not  speaking  aright  of  God.  The  issue  of  the  breach  is, 
that  the  wrath  or  anger  of  God  was  towards  them  ;  recon- 
ciliation  is  the  turning  away  of  that  wrath  ;  the  means 
whereby  this  was  to  be  done,  appointed  of  God,  is  the  sa- 
crifice of  Job  for  atonement. 

This  then  is  that  which  we  ascribe  to  the  death  of  Christ, 
when  we  say  that  as  a  sacrifice  we  were  reconciled  to  God 
by  it ;  or  that  he  made  reconciliation  for  us.  Having  made 
God  our  enemy  by  sin  (as  before),  Christ  by  his  death 
turned  away  his  anger,  appeased  his  wrath,  and  brought  us 
into  favour  again  with  God:  before  the  proof  of  this,  I 
must  needs  give  one  caution  as  to  some  terms  of  this  dis- 
course, as  also  remove  an  objection  that  lies  at  the  very 
entrance  against  the  whole  nature  of  that  which  is  treat- 
ed of. 

For  the  first,  when  we  speak  of  the  anger  of  God,  his 
wrath,  and  his  being  appeased  towards  us,  we  speak  after  the 
manner  of  men,  but  yet  by  the  allowance  of  God  himself; 
not  that  God  is  properly  angry,  and  properly  altered  from 
that  state  and  appeased,  whereby  he  should  properly  be 
mutable  and  be  actually  changed  ;  but  by  the  anger  of  God, 
which  sometimes  in  Scripture  signifyeth  his  justice  from 
whence  punishment  proceeds,  sometimes  the  effects  of  an- 
ger or  punishment  itself,  the  obstacles  before-mentioned  on 
the  part  of  God,  from  his  nature,  justice,  law,  and  truth  are 
intended  ;  and  his  being  appeased  towards  us,  his  being  sa- 
tisfied as  to  all  the  bars  so  laid  in  the  way  from  receiving 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  171 

US  to  favour,  without  the  least  alteration  in  him,  his  nature, 
will,  or  justice  :  and  according  to  the  analogy  hereof,  I  desire 
that  whatever  is  spoken  of  the  anger  of  God,  and  his  being 
appeased  or  altered,  which  is  the  language  wherein  he  con- 
verseth  with  us,  and  instructs  us  to  wisdom,  may  be  mea- 
sured and  interpreted. 

2.  The  objection  I  shall  propose  in  the  words  of  Crellius. 
'  Si  in  eo  sita  est  dilectio,  quod  Deus  nos  dilexerit  et  filium 
suum  miserit  <Xa<r|Uoi^  pro  peccatis  nostris,  quoraodo  Christus 
morte  sua  demum  iram  Dei  adversus  nos  incensamplacarit? 
nam  cum  dilectio  ilia  Dei  quse  plane  fuit  summa,  causa  fuit 
cur  Deus  filium  suum  charissimum  miserit,  necesse  est  ut 
iram  jam  suam  adversus  nos  deposuerit:  nonne  aliter  eodem 
tempore  et  impense  amabit,  et  non  amabit?  si  Deus  etiam 
tum  potuit  nobis  irasci,  cum  filium  suum  charissimum  su- 
premge  nostree  felicitatis  causa  morti  acerbissimse  objiceret, 
quod  satis  magnum  argumentum  erit,  ex effectu  ejus  petitum, 
unde  cognoscamus  Deum  nobis  non  irasci  amplius.'  Crell. 
Defen.  Socin.  con.  Grot,  part  6. 

To  the  same  purpose  Socinus  himself.  *  Demonstravi  non 
modo  Christum  Deo  nos,  non  autem  Deum  nobis  reconci- 
liasse,  verum  etiam  Deum  ipsum  fuisse  qui  banc  reconcilia- 
tionem  fecerit.'  Socin.  de  Servator.  lib.  1.  part.  1.  cap.  I. 

*  If  this  be  the  chiefest  and  highest  love  of  God,  that  he 
sent  Christ  his  only  Son  to  be  a  propitiation  for  our  sins ; 
how  then  could  Christ  by  his  death  appease  the  wrath  of 
God,  that  was  incensed  against  us  ?  For  seeing  that  God's 
love  was  the  cause  of  sending  Christ,  he  must  needs  before 
that  have  laid  aside  his  anger :  for  otherwise,  should  he  not 
intensely  love  us,  and  not  love  us  at  the  same  time?  And 
if  God  could  then  be  angry  with  us,  when  he  gave  up  his 
Son  to  bitter  death  for  our  everlasting  happiness,  what  ar- 
gument or  evidence  at  any  time  can  we  have  from  the  effect 
of  it,  whence  we  may  know,  that  God  is  not  farther  angry 
with  us  V 

To  the  same  purpose  is  the  plea  of  the  catechist,  cap.  8. 
*  De  Morte  Christi.'  Quest.  31,  32. 

Ans.  The  love  wherewith  God  loved  us,  when  he  sent 
his  Son  to  die  for  us,  was  the  most  intense  and  supreme  in 
its  own  kind ;  nor  would  admit  of  any  hatred  or  enmity  in 
God  towards  us,  that  stood  in  opposition  thereunto.     It  is 

N  2 


172  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.      . 

every  where  set  forth  as  the  most  intense  love;  John  iii.  16. 
Rom.  V.  7,  8.  1  John  iv.  10.  Now  this  love  of  God,  is  an 
eternal  free  act  of  his  will:  his  purpose,  Rom.  ix.  11.  '  his 
good  pleasure,'  his  purpose  that  he  purposed  in  himself,  as  it 
is  called  ;  it  is  his  irpo^eaig,  Trpoyvwaig ;  1  Pet.  i.  2.  tvSoKia, 
as  I  have  elsewhere  distinctly  declared ;  a  love  that  was  to 
have  an  efficacy  by  means  appointed :  but  for  a  love  of 
friendship,  approbation,  acceptation,  as  to  our  persons  and 
duties,  God  bears  none  unto  us,  but  as  considered  in  Christ, 
and  for  his  sake.  It  is  contrary  to  the  whole  design  of  the 
Scripture,  and  innumerable  particular  testimonies,  once  to 
fancy  a  love  of  friendship,  and  acceptation  towards  any  in 
God,  and  not  consequent  to  the  death  of  Christ. 

2.  This  love  of  God's  purpose  and  good  pleasure,  this 
*  charitas  ordinativa,'  hath  not  the  least  inconsistency  with 
those  hinderances  of  peace  and  friendship,  on  the  part  of 
God,  before-mentioned  ;  for  though  the  holiness  of  God's 
nature,  the  justice  of  his  government,  the  veracity  of  his 
word,  will  not  allow  that  he  take  a  sinner  into  friendship  and 
communion  with  himself,  without  satisfaction  made  to  him, 
yet  this  liinders  not,  but  that  in  his  sovereign  good-will  and 
pleasure,  he  might  purpose  to  recover  us  from  that  condi- 
tion, by  the  holy  means  which  he  appointed.  God  did  not 
love  us,  and  not  love  us,  or  was  angry  with  us,  at  the  same 
time,  and  in  the  same  respect.  He  loved  us,  in  respect  of 
the  free  purpose  of  his  will,  to  send  Christ  to  redeem  us,  and 
to  satisfy  for  our  sin ;  he  was  angry  with  us,  in  respect  of 
his  violated  law  and  provoked  justice  by  sin. 

3.  God  loves  our  persons,  as  we  are  his  creatures ;  is  an- 
gry with  us,  as  we  are  his  sinners. 

4.  It  is  true,  that  we  can  have  no  greater  evidence  and 
argument  of  the  love  of  God's  good-will  and  pleasure  in  ge- 
neral, than  in  sending  his  Son  to  die  for  sinners  ;  and  that 
he  is  not  angry  with  them,  with  an  anger  of  hatred,  opposite 
to  that  love ;  that  is,  with  an  eternal  purpose  to  destroy 
them  ;  but  for  a  love  of  friendship  and  acceptation,  we  have 
innumerable  other  pledges  and  evidences,  as  is  known,  and 
might  be  easily  declared. 

These  things  being  premised,  the  confirmation  of  what 
was  proposed  ensues. 

1.  The  use  and  sense  of  the  words,  whereby  this  doctrine 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  173 

of  our  reconciliation  is  expressed,  evinces  the  truth  con- 
tended for,  iXacFKea^m,  (caraXacro-tiv  and  diroKaToXacraHv,  which 
are  the  words  used  in  this  business,  are  as  much  as  'iram 
avertere,' '  to  turn  away  anger ;'  so  is '  reconciliare,  propitiare,' 
and  '  placare,'  in  Latin :  '  Impius,  ne  audeto  placare  iram 
Deorum,'  was  a  law  of  the  Twelve  Tables  :  iXa(ri>:o/xa<,  *  pro- 
pitior,  placor,'  iXaafiog,  '  placio,  exoratio  ;'  Gloss,  vetus  ;  and 
in  this  sense  is  the  word  used ;  oaa  fiivroi  irpoQ  iXaa^ovg 
0fwv  17  opdrojv  diroTpoTrag  (nivrtyopevov  oi  fxavTHg.  Plut.  in 
Fabio  :  to  '  appease  their  gods,  and  turn  away  the  things  they 
feared.'  And  the  same  author  tells  us  of  away  taken,  k^iXaa- 
^ai  TO  ny]vifxa  ^eov,  to  '  appease  the  anger  of  God.'  And 
Xenophon  useth  the  word  to  the  same  purpose  ;  TroAXa  jutv 
TTfjUTTWi/  dva^ijfxara  \pvad  vroXXa,  Se  dpyvpu  TrofXTToXXa  Ot  S'uwi', 
l^iXaadfxr^v  ttotI  uvtov.  And  so  also  doth  Livy  use  the  word 
'reconcilio  :  non  movit  modo  talis  oratio  regem,  sed  etiam 
reconciliavit  Annibali.  Bell.  Macedon.'  And  many  more  in- 
stances might  be  given.  God  then  being  angry  and  averse 
from  love  of  friendship  with  us,  as  hath  been  declared,  and 
Christ  being  said  thus  to  make  reconciliation  for  us  with 
God,  he  did  fully  turn  away  the  wrath  of  God  from  us,  as 
by  the  testimonies  of  it  will  appear. 

Before  I  produce  our  witnesses  in  this  cause,  I  must  give 
this  one  caution  5  it  is  not  said  any  where  expressly,  that 
God  is  reconciled  to  us,  but  that  we  are  reconciled  to  God. 
And  the  sole  reason  thereof  is,  because  he  is  the  party  of- 
fended, and  we  are  the  parties  offending.  Now  the  party 
offending,  is  always  said  to  be  reconciled  to  the  party  offend- 
ed, and  not  on  the  contrary ;  so  Matt.  v.  23,  24.  *  If  thy 
brother  have  ought  against  thee,  go  and  be  reconciled  to 
him;'  the  brother  being  the  party  offended,  he  that  had 
offended,  was  to  be  reconciled  to  him  by  turning  away  his 
anger:  and  in  common  speech,  when  one  hath  justly  pro- 
voked another,  we  bid  him  go  and  reconcile  himself  to  him  ; 
that  is,  do  that  which  may  appease  him,  and  give  an  entrance 
into  his  favour  again.  So  is  it  in  the  case  under  considera- 
tion ;  being  the  parties  offending,  we  are  said  to  be  recon- 
ciled to  God,  when  his  anger  is  turned  away,  and  we  are 
admitted  into  his  favour.  Let  now  the  testimonies  speak 
for  themselves. 


174  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

Rom.  V.  10.  '  When  we  were  enemies  we  were  reconciled 
to  God  by  the  death  of  his  Son;'  KaTrrXXaynn^v  ri^  Oec^,  we 
were  reconciled  to  God,  or  *  brought  again  into  his  favour.' 
Amongst  the  many  reasons  that  might  be  given  to  prove 
the  intention  of  this  expression  to  be,  *  that  we  were  recon- 
ciled to  God,'  by  the  averting  of  his  anger  from  us,  and 
our  accepting  into  favour ;  I  shall  insist  on  some  few  from 
the  context. 

1.  It  appears  from  the  relation  that  this  expression  bears 
to  that  of  ver.  8.  '  whilst  we  were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for 
us;'  with  which  this  upon  the  matter  is  the  same,  'we  are 
reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of  his  Son.'  Now  the  intent 
of  this  expression,  '  Christ  died  for  us  sinners,'  is,  he  died 
to  bring  us  sinners  into  the  favour  of  God  ;  nor  will  it  admit 
of  any  other  sense ;  so  is  our  being  reconciled  to  God  by  the 
death  of  his  Son :  and  that  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  ex- 
pression, '  Christ  died  for  us,'  is  evident  from  the  illustration 
given  to  it  by  the  apostle;  ver.  6,  7.  '  Christ  died  for  the 
ungodly.'  How?  as  one  man  dieth  for  another;  that  is,  to 
deliver  him  from  death. 

2.  From  the  description  of  the  same  thing  in  other  words ; 
ver.  9.  *  being  justified  by  his  blood.'  That  it  is  the  same 
thing  upon  the  matter  that  is  here  intended,  appears  from 
the  contexture  of  the  apostle's  speech,  '  whilst  we  were  yet 
enemies  Christ  died  for  us;  much  more  being  justified  by 
his  blood.'  And,  '  if  when  we  were  enemies  we  were 
reconciled  to  God ;'  the  apostle  repeats  what  he  had  said 
before  ;  '  if  when  we  were  enemies  Christ  died  for  us,'  and 
*  we  were  justified  by  the  blood  of  Christ;'  that  is, '  if  when 
we  were  enemies  we  were  reconciled  to  God.'  Now  to  be 
justified,  is  God's  reconciliation  to  us,  his  acceptation  of  us 
into  favour,  not  our  conversion  to  him,  as  is  known  and 
confessed. 

3.  The  reconciliation  we  have  with  God,  is  a  thing  ten- 
dered to  us,  and  we  do  receive  it ;  ver.  1 1 .  KaToXXayiiv  IXd- 
j3ojLiei',  '  we  have  received  the  reconciliation  or  atonement.' 
Now  this  cannot  be  spoken  in  reference  to  our  reconciliation 
to  God,  as  on  our  side,  but  of  his  to  us,  and  our  acceptation 
with  him.  Our  reconciliation  to  God  is  our  conversion;  but 
we  are  not  said  to  receive  our  conversion,  or  to  have  our 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  175 

conversion  tendered  to  us;  but  to  convert  ourselves,  or  to  be 
converted. 

4.  The  state  and  condition  from  whence  we  are  delivered 
by  this  reconciliation,  is  described  in  this,  that  we  are  called 
enemies,  '  being  enemies  we  were  reconciled.'  Now  enemies 
in  this  place  are  the  same  with  sinners.  And  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  sinners,  that  is,  of  those  who  had  rebelled  against 
God,  provoked  him,  were  obnoxious  to  wrath,  is  certainly 
the  procuring  of  the  favour  of  God  for  them.  When  you  say, 
such  a  poor  conquered  rebel,  that  expected  to  be  tortured 
and  slain,  is  by  means  of  such  a  one  reconciled  to  his  prince; 
what  is  it  that  you  intend  ?  Is  it  that  he  begins  to  like  and 
love  his  prince  only,  or  that  his  prince  lays  down  his  wrath 
and  pardons  him? 

5.  All  the  considerations  before  insisted  on,  declaring  in 
what  sense  we  are  saved  by  the  death  of  Christ,  prove  our 
reconciliation  with  God,  to  be  our  acceptation  with  him  not 
our  conversion  to  him. 

2  Cor.  v.  18 — 21.  Is  a  place  of  the  same  importance  with 
that  above-mentioned,  wherein  the  reconciliation  pleaded 
for  is  asserted,  and  the  nature  of  it  explained.  '  And  all 
things  are  of  God,  who  hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Je- 
sus Christ,  and  hath  given  to  us  the  ministry  of  reconcilia- 
tion, to  wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to 
himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto  them,  and  hath 
committed  unto  us  the  word  of  reconciliation.  Now  then  we 
are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as  though  God  did  beseech  you 
by  us,  we  pray  you  in  Christ's  stead  be  ye  reconciled  to 
God.  For  he  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no 
sin,  that  we  might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him.' 

There  is  in  the  words  a  twofold  reconciliation. 

1.  Of  God  to  man,  ver.  18.  'God  hath  reconciled  us  to 
himself  by  Jesus  Christ.' 

2.  Our  reconciliation  to  God,  in  the  acceptance  of  that 
reconciliation,  which  we  are  exhorted  to. 

The  first  is  that  inquired  after;  the  reconciliation  where- 
by the  anger  of  God  by  Christ  is  turned  away,  and  those 
for  whom  he  died  are  brought  into  his  favour ;  which  com- 
prises the  satisfaction  proposed  to  confirmation.     For, 

1.  Unless  it  be  that  God  is  so  reconciled  and  atoned, 
whence  is  it  that  he  is  thus  proclaimed  to  be  a  Father  to- 


176  OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST. 

wards  sinners  as  he  is  here  expressed  ?  Out  of  Christ  he  is  a 
consuming  fire  to  sinners,  and  everlasting  burnings,  Isa. 
xxxiii.  14.  '  Being  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  inquity ;'  Hab. 
i.  13.  *  Before  whom  no  sinner  shall  appear  or  stand;'  Psal. 
V.  4,  5.  So  that  where  there  is  no  sacrifice  for  sin,  there 
'remains  nothing  to  sinners, but  a  certain  fearful  looking  for 
of  judgment  and  fiery  indignation  that  shall  consume  the 
adversaries  ;'  Heb.  x.  26,  27.  How  comes  then  this  jealous 
God,  this  holy  God,  and  just  Judge,  to  command  some  to 
beseech  sinners  to  be  reconciled  to  him  ?  the  reason  is  given 
before.  It  is  because  he  reconciles  us  to  himself  by  Christ, 
or  in  Christ.  That  is  by  Christ  his  anger  is  pacified,  his 
justice  satisfied  and  himself  appeased,  or  reconciled  to  us. 

2.  The  reconciliation  mentioned,  is  so  expounded  in  the 
cause  and  effect  of  it,  as  not  to  admit  of  any  other  inter- 
pretation. 

1.  The  effect  of  God's  being  reconciled,  or  his  reconcil- 
ing the  world  to  himself,  is  in  those  words  ;  *  Not  imputing 
to  them  their  trespasses.'  God  doth  so  reconcile  us  to  him- 
self by  Christ,  as  not  to  impute  our  trespasses  to  us.  That 
is,  not  dealing  with  us  according  as  justice  required  for  our 
sins  upon  the  account  of  Christ's  remitting  the  penalty  due 
to  them;  laying  away  his  anger,  and  receiving  us  to  favour. 
This  is  the  immediate  fruit  of  the  reconciliation  spoken  of; 
if  not,  the  reconciliation  itself,  non-imputation  of  sin,  is  not 
our  conversion  to  God, 

2.  The  cause  of  it  is  expressed,  ver.  21.  'He  made  him 
to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no  sin.'  How  comes  it  to  pass 
that  God  the  righteous  Judge  doth  thus  reconcile  us  to  him- 
self, and  not  impute  to  us  our  sins?  It  is  because  he  hath 
made  Christ  to  be  sin  for  us ;  that  is,  either  a  sacrifice  for 
sin,  or  as  sin,  by  the  imputation  of  our  sin  to  him.  He  was 
made  sin  for  us,  as  we  are  made  the  righteousness  of  God 
in  him.  Now  we  are  made  the  righteousness  of  God  by  the 
imputation  of  his  righteousness  to  us.  So  was  he  made  sin  for 
us  by  the  imputation  of  our  sin  to  him.  Now  for  God  to  re- 
concile us  to  himself  by  imputing  our  sin  to  Christ,  and  there- 
on not  imputing  them  to  us,  can  be  nothing  but  his  being  ap- 
peased and  atoned  towards  us,  with  his  receiving  us  to  his 
favour,  by  and  upon  the  account  of  the  death  of  Christ. 

3.  This  reconciling  of  us  to  himself,  is  the  matter  com- 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  177 

mitted  to  the  preachers  of  the  gospel,  whereby,  or  by  the 
declaration  whereof,  they  should  persuade  us  to  be  recon- 
ciled to  God.  He  hath  committed  to  us,  tov  \6yov  rrig  /ca- 
ToXXayiig'  this  doctrine  concerning  reconciliation  mentioned  ; 
'We  therefore  beseech  you  to  be  reconciled  to  God.'  That 
which  is  the  matter  whereby  we  are  persuaded  to  be  recon- 
ciled to  God,  cannot  be  our  conversion  itself,  as  is  pretended. 
The  preachers  of  the  gospel  are  to  declare  this  word  of  God, 
viz.  '  that  he  hath  reconciled  us  to  himself,'  by  the  blood  of 
Christ,  the  blood  of  the  new  testament  that  was  shed  for 
us,  and  thereon  persuade  us  to  accept  of  the  tidings,  or  the 
subject  of  them,  and  to  be  at  peace  with  God.  Can  the  sense 
be,  we  are  converted  to  God,  therefore  be  ye  converted  ? 
This  testimony  then  speaks  clearly  to  the  matter  under 
debate. 

3.  The  next  place  of  the  same  import  is,  Eph.  ii.  12 — 16. 
'  That  at  that  time  ye  were  without  Christ,  being  aliens  from 
the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  strangers  from  the  covenant 
of  promise,  having  no  hope,  and  without  God  in  the  world. 
But  now  in  Christ  .Tesns  ye  who  sometimes  were  far  off,  are 
made  nigh  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  For  he  is  our  peace,  who 
hath  made  both  one,  and  hath  broken  down  the  middle  wall 
of  partition  between  us.  Having  abolished  in  his  flesh  the 
enmity,  even  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in  ordi- 
nances, for  to  make  in  himself  of  twain  one  new  man,  so 
making  peace.  And  that  he  might  reconcile  both  unto  God 
in  one  body  by  the  cross  having  slain  the  enmity  thereby.' 

Here  is  mention  of  a  twofold  enmity. 

1.  Of  the  Gentiles  unto  God. 

2.  Of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles,  among  themselves. 

1.  Of  the  Gentiles  unto  God  ;  ver.  12.  Consider  them  as 
they  are  there  described,  and  their  enmity  to  God  is  suffi- 
ciently evident.  And  what  in  that  estate  was  the  respect  of 
God  unto  them  ?  What  is  it  towards  such  persons  as  there 
described?  'The  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  them;'  John 
iii.  36.  '  they  are  children  of  wrath  ;'  Eph.  ii.  3.  So  are  they 
there  expressly  called  :  '  he  hateth  all  the  workers  of  ini- 
quity ;'  Psal.  v.  5.  and  will  by  no  means  '  acquit  the 
guilty  ;'  Exod.  xxxiv.  7.  Yea,  he  curseth  those  families  that 
call  not  on  his  name. 

2.  Of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  among  themselves  :  which 


178  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

is  expressed,  both  in  the  thing  itself,  and  in  the  cause  of  it : 
it  is  called  enmity,  and  said  to  arise  from,  or  be  occasioned 
and  improved  by,  the  law  of  commandments  contained  in 
ordinances;  the  occasion,  improvement,  and  management 
of  this  enmity  between  them,  see  elsewhere. 

2.  Here  is  mention  of  a  twofold  reconciliation. 

1.  Of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  among  themselves  ;  ver. 
14,  15.  '  He  is  our  peace,  and  hath  made  both  one,  slaying 
the  enmity,  so  making  peace.' 

2.  Of  both  unto  God  ;  ver.  16.  *  that  he  might  reconcile 
both  unto  God.' 

3.  The  manner  whereby  this  reconciliation  was  wrought; 
in  his  body  by  the  cross. 

The  reconciliation  unto  God  is  that  aimed  at :  this  re- 
conciliation is  the  reconciling  of  God  unto  us,  on  the  ac- 
count of  the  blood  of  Christ,  as  hath  been  declared.  The 
bringing  of  us  into  his  favour,  by  the  laying  away  of  his 
wrath  and  enmity  against  us  :  which  appears, 

1.  From  the  cause  of  it  expressed  :  that  is,  the  body  of 
Christ,  by  the  cross  ;  or  the  death  of  Christ.  Now  the  death 
of  Christ  was  immediately  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  '  This 
is  the  blood  of  the  new  testament  that  was  shed  for  many 
for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.'  It  is  by  shedding  of  his  blood, 
that  we  have  remission  or  forgiveness.  That  this  is  by  an 
atoning  of  God,  or  our  acceptance  into  favour,  is  confessed. 

2.  From  the  expression  itself:  airoKaTaWa^y  Iv  Ivl  (TwfjaTi 
Ti^  ^£(^.  T(^  3-£f^  denotes  one  party  in  the  business  of  re- 
conciliation. He  made  peace  between  them  both ;  between 
the  Gentiles  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Jews  on  the  other ; 
and  he  made  peace  between  them  both,  and  God  ;  Jews  and 
Gentiles  on  the  one  hand,  and  God  on  the  other  :  so  that 
God  is  a  party  in  the  business  of  reconciliation,  and  is  therein 
reconciled  to  us  ;  for  our  reconciliation  to  him,  is  mentioned 
in  our  reconciliation  together,  which  cannot  be  done  without 
our  conversion. 

3.  From  the  description  of  the  enmity  given  ver.  12. 
which  plainly  shews  (as  was  manifested),  that  it  was  on  both 
sides.  Now  this  reconciliation  unto  God  is  by  the  removal 
of  that  enmity.  And  if  so,  God  was  thereby  reconciled,  and 
atoned,  if  he  hath  any  anger  or  indignation  against  sin,  or 
sinners. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  179 

4.  Because  this  reconciliation  of  both  to  God,  is  the 
great  cause  and  means  of  their  reconciliation  among  them- 
selves. God,  through  the  blood  of  Christ,  or  on  the  account 
of  his  death,  receiving  both  into  favour,  their  mutual  enmity- 
ceased,  and  without  it  never  did,  nor  ever  will.  And  this  is 
the  reconciliation  accomplished  by  Christ. 

The  same  might  be  said  of  the  other  places  ;  Col.  i. 
20,  21.  But  I  shall  not  need  to  multiply  testimonies  to  the 
same  purpose.  Thus  we  have  reconciliation  by  Christ,  in 
that  he  hath  made  atonement  or  satisfaction  for  our  sins. 
The  observations  given  On  these  texts,  being  suited  to  ob- 
viate the  exceptions  of  Socinus  treating  of  this  subject,  in 
his  book  '  de  Servatore,'  without  troubling  the  reader  with 
the  repetition  of  his  words. 

That  which  in  the  next  place  I  thought  to  do,  is  to  prove 
that  we  have  this  reconciliation  by  the  death  of  Christ  as  a 
sacrifice.  But  because  I  cannot  do  this  to  my  own  satis- 
faction, without  insisting,  first,  on  the  whole  doctrine  of  sa- 
crifices in  general ;  secondly,  on  the  institution,  nature,  end, 
and  efficacy,  of  the  sacrifices  of  the  Aaronical  priesthood  ; 
thirdly,  the  respect  and  relation  that  was  between  them, 
and  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  both  in  general  and  in  particular ; 
and  from  all  these  considerations  at  large  deducing  the  con- 
clusion proposed ;  and  finding  that  this  procedure  would 
draw  out  this  treatise  to  a  length,  utterly  beyond  my  expec- 
tation, I  shall  not  proceed  in  it ;  but  refer  it  to  a  peculiar 
discourse  on  that  subject. 

That  which  I  proposed  to  confirmation  at  the  entrance  of 
this  discourse,  was  the  satisfaction  made  by  the  blood  of 
Christ.  This  being  proposed  under  several  considerations 
hath  thus  far  been  severally  handled  :  that  his  death  was  a 
price,  that  we  have  redemption  thereby  properly  so  called, 
was  first  evinced.  That  truth  standing,  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ  is  sufficiently  established,  our  adversaries  themselves 
being  judges.  The  sacrifice  that  he  offered  in  his  death  hath 
also  been  manifested.  Hereof  is  the  reconciliation  now  de- 
livered, the  fruit  and  effect.  This  also  is  no  less  destructive 
of  the  design  of  these  men  :  what  they  have  to  object  against 
that  which  hath  been  spoken,  shall  have  the  next  place  in 
our  discourse. 

Thus  then  our  catechiststo  this  business,  in  the  31st  and 


180  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

32d  questions  of  the  8th  chapter,  which  is  about  the  death 
of  Christ. 

*  Q.  What''  say  you  then  to  those  places,  that  affirm  that  he 
reconciled  us  to  God  ? 

*  A.  1.  That'  the  Scripture  nowhere  says,  that  God  was  re- 
conciled to  us  by  Christ.  But  this  only,  that  by  Christ,  or 
the  death  of  Christ  we  are  reconciled,  or  reconciled  to  God, 
as  may  appear  from  all  those  places,  where  reconciliation  is 
treated  of.  Wherefore  from  those  places,  the  satisfaction  can- 
not be  proved.  2.  Because  it  is  evident  in  the  Scripture, 
that  God  reconciled  us  to  himself,  which  evinceth  the  opi- 
nion of  the  adversaries,  to  be  altogether  false ;  2  Cor.  v.  18. 
Col.  i.  20.  22. 

Ans.  1.  Whether  there  be  any  mention  of  such  a  recon- 
ciliation, as  whereby  the  anger  of  God  is  turned  away,  and 
we  received  into  favour,  in  the  Scripture,  the  reader  will 
judge  from  what  hath  b'een  already  proposed,  and  thither 
we  appeal.  It  is  not  about  words  and  syllables  that  we  con- 
tend, but  things  themselves.  The  reconciliation  of  God  to 
us  by  Christ,  is  so  expressed,  as  the  reconciliation  of  a 
judge  to  an  offender,  of  a  king  to  a  rebel,  may  be  expressed. 

2.  If  Christ  made  reconciliation  for  us,  and  for  our  sins 
an  atonement,  he  made  the  satisfaction  for  us  which  we 
plead  for. 

3.  It  is  true,  God  is  said  to  reconcile  us  to  himself;  but 
always  by  Christ,  by  the  blood  of  Christ :  proposing  himself 
as  reconciled  thereby,  and  declaring  to  us  the  atonement, 
that  we  may  turn  imto  him. 

They  add. 

'  Q.  But'  what  thinkest  thou  of  this  reconciliation  ? 

*  A.  That  Jesus  Christ  shewed  a  way  to  us,  who  by 
reason  of  our  sins  were  enemies  to  God,  and  alienated  from 
him,  how  we  ought  to  turn  unto  God,  and  by  that  means  be 
reconciled  to  him.' 

h  Ad  hsec  vero,  quod  nos  Deo  reconciliarit  quid  affersl — Priraum,  nusquam 
scripturam  asserere,  Deura  nobis  a  Christo  reconciliatuni ;  verum  id  tantum,  quod 
nos  per  Christum  aut  mortem  ejus,  simus  reconciliati,  vel  Deo  reconciliati,  ut  ex 
omnibus  locis,  qute  de  hac  reconciliatione  agnnt,  videre  est.  Quare  nullo  niodo  ex 
lis  omnibus  locis  ea  satisfactio  extrui  potest,  deinde  vero  quod  aperte  in  Scripluris 
extat,  Deum  nos  sibi  reconciliasse,  id  opinionem  adversariorum  prorsus  faisam  esse 
evincit;  2  Cor.  v.  18.  Col.  i.  20.  23. 

>  Quid  vero  de  hac  reconciliatione  sentis  ? — Christum  Jesum  nobis,  qui  propter 
peccata  nostra  Dei  inimici  eramus,  et  ab  eo  abalienati,  vjam  ostendisse,  quemadmo- 
dum  nos  ad  Deum  convert!,  atque,  ad  eum  modum  ei  reconciliari  oporteat. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  181 

Ans.  I  suppose  there  was  never  a  more  perverse  de- 
scription of  any  thing,  part,  or  parcel  of  the  gospel,  by  any 
men  fixed  on.  Some  of  the  excellencies  of  it  may  be  pointed 
out. 

1.  Here  is  a  reconciliation  between  two  parties,  and  yet 
a  reconciliation  but  of  one;  the  other  excluded. 

2.  An  enmity  on  one  side  only,  between  God  and  sin- 
ners, is  supposed,  and  that  on  the  part  of  the  sinners  ;  when 
the  Scriptures  do  much  more  abound  in  setting  out  the  en- 
mity of  God  against  them  as  such ;  his  wrath  abiding  on 
them,  as  some  will  find  one  day  to  their  eternal  sorrow. 

3.  Reconciliation  is  made  nothing  but  conversion,  or 
conversion  to  God  ;  which  yet  are  terms  and  things,  in  the 
Scriptures  every  where  distinguished, 

4.  We  are  said  to  be  enemies  to  God,  'propter  peccata 
nostra,'  when  the  Scripture  says  every  where,  '  that  God  is 
an  enemy  to  us,'  'propter peccata  nostra.'  He  hateth  and  is 
angry  with  sinners,  'his  judgment  is  that  they  which  com- 
mit sin,  are  worthy  of  death."' 

5.  Here  is  no  mention  of  the  death  and  blood  of  Christ, 
which  in  every  place  in  the  whole  Scripture  where  this  re- 
conciliation is  spoken  of,  is  expressly  laid  down  as  the 
cause  of  it;  and  necessarily  denotes  the  reconciliation  of 
God  to  us  by  the  averting  of  his  anger,  as  the  effect  of  it. 

6.  Did  Christ  by  his  death  shew  us  a  way,  whereby  we 
might  come  to  be  reconciled  to  God,  or  convert  ourselves  ? 
What  was  that  way  ?  Is  it,  that  God  lays  punishment,  and 
affliction,  and  death,  on  them  who  are  no  way  liable  there- 
unto ?  What  else  can  we  learn  from  the  death  of  Christ,  ac- 
cording to  these  men  ?  The  truth  is,  they  mention  not  his 
death,  because  they  know  not  how  to  make  their  ends  hang 
together. 

This  is  the  sum,  of  what  they  say.  We  are  reconciled  to 
God,  that  is,  we  convert  ourselves,  by  the  death  of  Christ; 
that  is,  not  by  his  death,  but  according  to  the  doctrine  he 
teacheth  ;  and  this  is  the  sum  of  the  doctrine  of  reconcilia- 
tion, Christ  teacheth  us  a  way  how  we  should  convert  our- 
selves to  God.     And  so  much  for  reconciliation. 

■'  Rom.  i.  32. 


182  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 


CHAP.  XXX. 

The  satisfaction  of  Christ,  on  the  consideration  of  his  death,  being  a  punish- 
ment, farther  evinced  ;  and  vindicated  from  the  exceptions  of  Smalcius. 

The  third  consideration  of  the  death  of  Christ,  was  of  it,  as 
it  was  penal,  as  therein  he  underwent  punishment  for  us,  or 
that  punishment,  which  for  sin  was  due  to  us.  Thence  di- 
rectly is  it  said  to  be  satisfactory.  About  the  word  itself, 
we  do  not  contend  ;  nor  do  our  adversaries  except  against 
it;  if  the  thing  itself  be  proved  that  is  intended  by  that  ex- 
pression, this  controversy  is  at  end.  Farther  to  open  the 
nature  of  satisfaction,  then,  by  what  is  said  before  about 
bearing  of  sins,  &c.  I  see  no  reason  ;  our  aim  in  that  word 
is  known  to  all,  and  the  sense  of  it  obvious.  This  is  made 
by  some  the  general  head  of  the  whole  business.  I  have 
placed  it  on  the  peculiar  consideration  of  Christ's  bearing 
our  sins,  and  undergoing  punishment  for  us.  What  our  ca- 
techists  say  to  the  whole,  I  shall  briefly  consider. 

Having  assigned  some  causes  and  effects  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  partly  true  in  their  own  place,  partly  false ;  they 
ask,  Q.  12. 

'  Is''  there  no  other  cause  of  the  death  of  Christ? 

'  A.  None  at  all.  As  for  that  which  Christians  com- 
monly think,  that  Christ  by  his  death,  merited  salvation  for 
us,  and  satisfied  fully  for  our  sins,  that  opinion  is  false  (or 
deceitful),  erroneous,  and  very  pernicious.' 

That  the  men  of  this  persuasion  are  bold  men,  we  are  not 
now  to  learn.  Only  this  assertion,  that  there  is  no  other 
cause  of  the  death  of  Christ,  but  what  they  have  mentioned, 
is  a  new  experiment  thereof. 

If  we  must  believe  that  these  men  know  all  things,  and 
the  whole  mind  of  God,  so  that  all  is  false  and  pernicious, 
that  lies  beyond  their  road  and  understanding,  there  may  be 
some  colour  for  this  confidence.  But  the  account  we  have 
already  taken  of  them,  will  not  allow  us  to  grant  them  this 
plea. 

a  Non  est  etiam  aliqua  alia  mortis  Christ!  causa  ? — Nulla  prorsus;  etsi  nunc  vulgo 
Christiani  sentiunt,  Christum  morte  sua  nobis  salutem  meruisse,  et  pro  peccatis  nos- 
tris  plenarie  satisfecisse,  quae  seiitentia  fallax  est  et  erronea,  et  admodum  perDiciosa. 
Cat.  Racov.  de  Mor.  Christi  cap.  8.  q.  I'i. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  183 

2.  Of  the  merit  of  Christ,  I  have  spoken  briefly  before. 
His  satisfaction  is  the  thing  opposed  chiefly.  What  they 
have  to  say  against  it,  shall  now  be  considered  ;  as  also 
how  this  imputation,  or  charge,  on  the  common  faith  of 
Christians,  about  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  to  be  false,  er- 
roneous, and  pernicious,  will  be  managed. 

*Q.  13.  How*^  is  it  false,  or  deceitful? 

'A,  That  it  is  false  (or  deceitful)  and  erroneous  is  hence 
evident ;  that  not  only  there  is  nothing  of  it  extant  in  the 
Scripture,  but  also,  that  it  is  repugnant  to  the  Scriptures  and 
sound  reason.' 

For  the  truth  of  this  suggestion,  that  it  is  not  extant  in 
Scripture,  I  refer  the  reader  to  what  hath  been  discoursed 
from  the  Scripture  about  it  already.  When  they,  or  any  for 
them,  shall  answer,  or  evade  the  testimonies  that  have  been 
produced,  or  may  yet  be  so  (for  I  have  yet  mentioned  none 
of  those  which  immediately  express  the  dying  of  Christ  for 
us,  nor  his  being  our  Mediator  and  surety  in  his  death)  they 
shall  have  liberty,  for  me,  to  boast  in  this  manner.  In  the 
meantime  we  are  not  concerned  in  their  wretched  confi- 
dence. But  let  us  see  how  they  make  good  their  assertion 
by  instances. 

'  Q.  14.  Shew  that  in  order? 

'  A.  That  it  is  not  in  the  Scripture,  this  is  an  argument, 
that  the  assertors  of  that  opinion  do  never  bring  evident  Scrip- 
tures for  the  proof  of  it ;  but  knit  certain  consequences,  by 
which  they  endeavour  to  make  good  what  they  assert :  which 
as  it  is  meet  to  admit,  when  they  are  necessarily  deduced 
from  Scripture,  so  it  is  certain  they  have  no  force,  when  they 
are  repugnant  to  the  Scripture.' 

But  what  is  it  that  we  do  not  prove  by  express  Scripture, 
and  that  in  abundance  ?  That  our  iniquity  was  laid  upon 
Christ ;  that  he  *  was  bruised,  grieved,  wounded,  killed  for  us ;' 
that  he  '  bare  our  iniquities,'  and  that  in  his  '  own  body  on 
the  tree,'  that  he  was  '  made  sin  for  us,'  and  a  curse;  that  we 

•>  Qua  ratione  1 — Quod  ad  id  quod  fallax  sit  et  erronea,  attinet,  id  hinc  perspi- 
cuum  est,  quod  non  solum  de  ea  nihil  extet  in  scripturis,  verum  etiam  Scripturis  et 
sanfe  rationi  repugnat  1 

«  Demoiistra  id  ordine  ? — Id  non  haberi  in  Scripturis  argumento  est,  quod  istius 
opinionis  assertores  nunquam  perspicuas  scripturas  afferunt,  ad  probandam  istam 
opinionem  :  verum  quasdam  consecutiones  nectunt,  quibus  quod  asserunt  efficere  co- 
nantur ;  quas  ut  admittere  sequum  est,  cum  ex  Scripturis  necessario  adstruuntur,  ita 
ubi  Scripturis  repuguantur,  eas  nulluui  vim  habere  certum  est.  Quest.  15. 


184  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

deserved  death,  and  he  '  died  for  us ;'  that  he  made  *  his  soul 
an  offering  for  sin,  laid  down  his  life  a  price  and  ransom  for 
us/  or  in  our  stead  ;  that  we  are  thereby  '  redeemed  and  re- 
conciled to  God ;'  that  our '  iniquities  being  laid  on  him,'  and 
he  bearing  them  (that  is  the  punishment  due  to  them),  *  we 
have  deliverance ;'  God  being  atoned,  and  his  wrath  removed, 
we  prove  not  by  consequence,  but  by  multitudes  of  express 
testimonies.  If  they  mean  that  the  word  *  satisfaction'  is  not 
found  in  Scripture  in  the  business  treated  of,  we  tell  them 
that  £3ti»K,  is,  and  Xvrpov,  oVrtXwrpov,  and  Xvrpwmg,  cittoXv- 
rpuxTig,  KaToXXayri  (all  words  of  a  cognate  significancy  there- 
to, and  of  the  same  importance  as  to  the  doctrine  under  con- 
sideration), are  frequently  used.  It  is  indeed  a  hard  task  to 
find,  satisfaction,  the  word,  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, or  the  Greek  of  the  New.  But  the  thing  itself  is  found 
expressly  a  hundred  times  over ;  and  their  great  master 
doth  confess,  that  it  is  not  the  word,  but  the  thing  itself, 
that  he  opposeth.  So  that  without  any  thanks  to  them  at 
all,  for  granting,  that  consequences  from  Scripture  may  be 
allowed  to  prove  matters  of  faith,  we  assure  them  our  doc- 
trine is  made  good  by  innumerable  express  testimonies  of 
the  word  of  God,  some  whereof  have  been  by  us  now  insisted 
on  ;  and  moreover,  that  if  they  and  their  companions  did 
not  wrest  the  Scriptui'es  to  strange  and  uncouth  senses,  never 
heard  of  before  amongst  men  professing  the  name  of  Christ, 
we  could  willingly  abstain  wholly  from  any  expression,  that 
is  not  jorjTwc  found  in  the  word  itself.  But  if  by  their  re- 
bellion against  the  truth,  and  attempts  to  pervert  all  the  ex- 
pressions of  the  word,  the  most  clear  and  evident,  to  per- 
verse and  horrid  abominations,  we  are  necessitated  to  them, 
they  must  bear  them  unless  they  can  prove  them  not  to  be 
true. 

Let  the  reader  observe,  that  they  grant,  that  the  conse- 
quences we  gather  from  Scripture  would  evince  that  which 
we  plead  and  contend  for,  were  it  not  but  that  they  are  re- 
pugnant to  other  Scriptures.  Let  them  then  manifest  the  truth 
of  their  pretension  by  producing  those  other  Scriptures,  or 
confess  that  they  are  self-condemned. 

Wherefore  they  ask, 

*  Q.  How''  is  it  repugnant  to  the  Scriptures  ? 

<i  Qui  vero  Scriptural  repugnat  ? — Ad  eum  niodura,  quod  Scripture  passim,  Deum 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  185 

*  A.  In  this  sort,  that  the  Scriptures  do  every  where  testify, 
that  God  forgives  sin  freely ;  2  Cor.  v.  19.  Rom.  iii.  24,  25. 
but  principally  under  the  new  covenant;  Eph.  ii.  8.  Matt. 
xviii.23.  Now  nothing  is  more  opposite  to  free  remission,  than 
satisfaction ;  so  that  if  a  creditor  be  satisfied,  either  by  the 
debtor  himself,  or  by  any  other  in  the  name  of  the  debtor, 
he  cannot  be  said  to  forgive  freely.* 

If  this  be  all  that  our  consequences  are  repugnant  unto 
in  the  Scripture,  we  doubt  not  to  make  a  speedy  reconcilia- 
tion. Indeed  there  was  never  the  least  difference  between  them. 
Not  to  dwell  long  upon  that  which  is  of  an  easy  despatch. 

1.  This  objection  is  stated  solely  to  the  consideration  of 
sin  as  a  debt,  which  is  metaphorical.  Sin  properly  is  an 
offence,  a  rebellion,  a  transgression  of  the  law,  an  injury  done, 
not  to  a  private  person,  but  a  governor  in  his  government. 

2.  The  two  first  places  mentioned,  2  Cor.  v.  18 — 20.  Rom. 
iii.  24,  25.  do  expressly  mention  the  payment  of  this  debt 
by  Christ  as  the  ground  of  God's  forgiveness,  remission,  and 
pardon  ;  the  payment  of  it,  I  say,  not  as  considered  meta- 
phorically, as  a  debt,  but  the  making  an  atonement  and  re- 
conciliation for  us,  who  had  committed  it,  considered  as  a 
crime  and  rebellion,  or  transgression. 

3.  We  say,  that  God  doth  most  freely  forgive  us,  as  Eph. 
ii.  8.  Matt,  xviii.  23.  without  requiring  any  of  the  debt  at 
our  hands,  without  requiring  any  price  or  ransom  from  us 
or  any  satisfaction  at  our  hands ;  but  yet  he  forgives  us  for 
Christ's  sake,  setting  forth  him  to  be  a  propitiation  through 
faith  in  his  blood  ;  he  laying  down  his  life  a  ransom  for  us, 
God  not  sparing  him,  but  giving  him  up  to  death  for 
us  all. 

4.  The  expression  of  another  satisfying  in  the  name  of 
the  debtor,  intends  either  one  procured  by  the  debtor,  and 
at  his  entreaty  undertaking  the  work,  or  one  graciously  given, 
and  assigned  to  be  in  his  stead,  by  the  creditor.  In  the  first 
sense  it  hath  an  inconsistency  with  free  remission,  in  the 
latter,  not  at  all. 

The  truth  is,  men  that  dream  of  an  opposition  between 

peccata  hominibus  gratiiito  remittere,  testentur,  2  Cor.  v.  19.  Rora.  iii.  24,  25.  po- 
tissimum  vero  sub  N.  Foedere,  Eph.  ii.  8.  Matt,  xviii.  23,  &c.  At  reinissioni  gra- 
tuitae  nihil  adversatur  magis,  quam  satisfactio.  Cui  eniin  creditori  satisfit,  vel  ab 
ipso  debitore,  vel  ab  alio  debitoris  nomine,  de  eo  dici  non  potest  vere,  eum  debitum 
gratuito  ex  ipsa  gratia  remisisse. 

VOL.  IX.  O 


]86  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

the  satisfaction  made  by  Christ,  the  surety,  and  Mediator 
of  the  new  covenant,  and  free  remission  made  to  us,  are  ut- 
terly ignorant  of  the  whole  mystery  of  the  gospel,  nature  of 
the  covenant,  and  whole  mediation  of  Christ ;  advancing 
carnal  imaginations  against  innumerable  testimonies  of  the 
Scripture,  witnessing  the  blessed  conspiration  between  them, 
to  tlie  praise  of  the  glorious  grace  of  God.     But  they  say, 

That  it  is  contrary  to®  reason  also,  because  it  would  hence 
follow, '  that  Christ  underwent  eternal  death,  if  lie  satisfied 
God  for  our  sins  :  seeing  it  is  manifest,  that  the  punishment 
we  deserved  by  our  sins,  was  eternal  death.  Also  it  would 
follow,  that  we  should  be  more  bound  to  Christ,  than  to  God 
himself,  as  to  him  who  had  shewn  us  greater  favour  in  satis- 
faction ;  but  God  receiving  satisfaction,  afforded  us  no  favour.' 

What,  little  relief  this  plea  will  afford  our  adversaries, 
will  quickly  appear.  For, 

1.  I  have  proved  that  Christ  underwent  that  death  that 
was  due  unto  sinners,  which  was  all  that  justice,  law,  or 
reason  required.  He  underwent  it,  though  it  was  impos- 
sible for  him  to  be  detained  by  it. 

2.  If  the  Racovians  do  not  think  us  obliged  to  God,  for 
sending  his  Son  out  of  his  infinite  and  eternal  love  to  die 
for  us,  causing  all  our  iniquities  to  meet  on  him,  justifying 
us  freely  (who  could  do  nothing  for  our  own  delivery)  through 
the  redemption  that  is  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  we  must  tell 
them,  that  (we  bless  his  holy  name)  we  are  not  of  that  mind; 
but  finding  a  daily  fruit  of  his  love  and  kindness,  upon  our 
souls,  do  know  that  we  are  bound  unto  him  eternally,  to  love, 
praise,  serve,  honour,  and  glorify  him,  beyond  what  we  shall 
ever  be  able  to  express. 

2.  For  the  inquiry  made,  and  comparison  instituted,  be- 
tween our  obligation  to  the  Father  and  the  Son,  or  which  of 
them  we  are  most  beholden  to,  we  profess  we  cannot  speak 
unto  it.  Our  obligation  to  both,  and  either  respectively,  is 
such,  that  if  our  affections  were  extended  immeasurably  to 
what  they  are,  yet  the  utmost  and  exactest  height  of  them 

e  Cedo  qui  istud  rationi  repngnef? — Idquidem  hinc  perspicuum  est,  qiiod  seque- 
retur  Cliiistuni  aeternam  raortcra  subiisse,  si  Deo  pro  peccatis  nostris  satisfecisset : 
cum  constet  poenam  quani  homines  peccatis  nieruerant  Eetcrnarn  mortem  esse  :  de- 
inde  consequeretur,  nos  Christo,  quam  Deo  ipsi  devinctiores  esse,  quippe  qui  satis- 
factione  multum  gratiae  nobis  ostendisset ;  Deus  veto  exacta  satisfactione,  nulla  pror- 
sus  gratia  nos  prosecutus  fuisset. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION     OF    CHRIST.  187 

would  be  due  to  both,  and  each  of  them  respectively.  We 
are  so  bound  to  one,  as  we  cannot  be  more  to  the  other;  be- 
cause to  both  in  the  absolutely  highest  degree.  This  we 
observe  in  the  Scriptures,  that  in  mentioning  the  work  of  re- 
demption, the  rise,  fountain,  and  spring  of  it  is  still  assigned 
to  be  in  the  love  of  the  Father :  the  carrying  of  it  on  in  the 
love  and  obedience  of  the  Son,  and  so  w^e  order  our  thoughts 
of  faith  towards  them.  The  Father  being  not  one  whit  the 
less  free  and  gracious  to  us,  by  loving  us  upon  the  satisfac- 
tion of  his  Son,  than  if  he  had  forgiven  us  (had  it  been  pos- 
sible) without  any  satisfaction  at  all. 

And  thus  is  this  article  of  the  Christian  faitli,  contrary 
to  Scripture,  thus  to  reason.    They  add, 

'  Q.  How''  also  is  it  pernicious  ? 

'A.  In  that  it  openeth  a  door  unto  men  to  sin,  or  at  least 
incites  them  to  sloth  in  following  after  holiness.  But  the 
Scripture  witnesseth  that  this  amongst  others  is  an  end  of 
the  death  of  Christ,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  our  ini- 
quity and  deliver  us  from  this  evil  world  that  v/e  might  be 
redeemed  from  our  vain  conversation,  and  have  our  con- 
sciences purged  from  dead  works,  that  we  might  serve  the 
living  God ;  Tit.  ii.  14.  Gal.  i.  4.   1  Pet.  i.  18.  Heb.  ix.  14.' 

That  the  deliverance  of  us  from  the  power  and  pollution 
of  our  sin,  the  purifying  of  our  souls  and  consciences,  the 
making  of  us  a  peculiar  people  of  God,  zealous  of  good  works, 
that  we  might  be  holy  and  blameless  before  him  in  love,  is 
one  eminent  end  of  the  death  of  Christ,  we  grant.  For  this 
end  by  his  death,  did  he  procure  the  Spirit  to  quicken  us, 
'  who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins/  sprinkling  us  with  the 
pure  water  thereof,  and  giving  us  daily  supplies  of  grace 
from  him,  that  we  might  grow  up  in  holiness  before  him, 
until  we  come  to  the  measure  in  this  life  assigned  to  us  in  him. 

But  that  the  consideration  of  the  cross  of  Christ,  and  the 
satisfaction  made  thereby,  should  open  a  door  of  licentious- 
ness to  sin,  or  encourage  men  to  sloth  in  the  ways  of  godli- 
ness, is  fit  only  for  them  to  assert,  to  whom  the  gospel  is  folly. 

•^  Cedo  etiam,  qui  Iiebc  opinio  est  perniciosa? — Ad  eum  niodtiiu,  quod  liominibus 
fenestram  ad  peccandi  licentiam  aperiat,  aut  certe  ad  socordiam  in  pietate  colenda 
eos  invitet.  Scriptiira  vero  testatur,  cum  inter  alios  Christi  mortis  fincra  esse,  ut  re- 
dimereraur  ab  omni  iniquitatc,  ex  hoc  seculo  nequara  eriperemur,  et  rcdimeremur  esc 
vana  conversatione  a  patribus  tradita,  et  mundareniur  conscientia  a  mortuis  operibufi 
ad  serviendura  Deo  viventi.  Tit.  ii.  14.  Gal.  i.  4.  1  Pet.  i.  18.  Heb.  is,  14. 

o  2 


188  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

What  is  it,  I  pray,  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross,  that  should 
thus  dispose  men  to  licentiousness  and  sloth?  Is  it  that 
God  is  so  provoked  with  every  sin,  that  it  is  impossible,  and 
against  his  nature  to  forgive  it,  without  inflicting  the  punish- 
ment due  thereto  ?  Or  is  it  that  God  so  loved  us,  that  he 
gave  his  only  Son  to  die  for  us,  or  that  Christ  loved  us,  and 
washed  us  in  his  own  blood  ?  Or  is  it  that  God  for  Christ's 
sake  doth  freely  forgive  us  ?  Yea,  but  our  adversaries  say, 
that  God  freely  forgives  us  ;  yea,  but  they  say  it  is  without 
satisfaction.  Is  it  then  an  encouragement  to  sin,  to  affirm 
that  God  forgives  us  freely  for  the  satisfaction,  of  his  Son? 
And  not  to  say,  that  he  forgives  us  freely  without  satisfac- 
tion ?  Doth  the  adding  of  satisfaction,  whereby  God  to  the 
highest  manifested  his  indignation  and  wrath  against  sin;  doth 
that,  I  say,  make  the  difference, and  give  the  encouragement? 
Who  could  have  discovered  this  but  our  catechists  and  their 
companions  ?  Were  this  a  season  for  that  purpose,  I  could 
easily  demonsitrate  that  there  is  no  powerful  or  effectual  mo- 
tive to  abstain  from  sin,  no  encouragement  or  incitation  unto 
holiness,  but  what  riseth  from,  or  relateth  unto,  the  satisfac- 
tion of  Chirst. 

And  this  is  that  which  they  have  to  make  good  their 
charge  against  the  common  faith,  that  it  is  false,  erroneous, 
and  pernicious.  Such  worthy  foundations  have  they  of  their 
great  superstruction,  ;or  rather  so  great  is  their  confidence, 
and  so  little  is  their  strength  for  the  pulling  down  of  the 
church  built  upon  the  rock. 

They  proceed  to  consider  what  testimonies  and  proofs 
(they  say)  we  produce  for  the  confirmation  of  the  truth  con- 
tended for.  What  (they  say)  we  pretend  from  reason  (though 
indeed  it  be  from  innumerable  places  of  Scripture),  I  have  vin- 
dicated not  long  since  to  the  full  in  my  book  of  the^  vindic- 
tive Justice  of  God,  and  answered  all  the  exceptions  given 
thereunto  ;  so  that  I  shall  not  translate  from  thence  what  I 
have  delivered  to  this  purpose,  but  pass  to  what  follows. 

Question  twelve  they  make  this  inquiry. 

*  Q.  Which''  are  the  Scriptures  out  of  which  they  endea- 
vour to  confirm  their  opinion  ? 

s  De  Justit.  divin.  Diatrib. 
''  Quae  vero  sunt  Scripturaeequibusilliopinionemsuatn  adstruere  conantur?  Eae, 
quae  testantur  Christum  vel  pro  peccatis  nostris  mortuum,  deinde,  quod  nos  redeinit. 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  189 

*A.  Those  which  testify  that  Christ  died  for  us,  or  for  our 
sins,  also  that  he  redeemed  us,  or  that  he  gave  himself  or  his 
life  a  redemption  for  many  ;  then,  that  he  is  our  Mediator : 
moreover,  that  he  reconciled  us  to  God,  and  is  a  propitiation 
for  our  sin.  Lastly,  from  those  sacrifices,  which  as  figures 
shadowed  forth  the  death  of  Christ.' 

So  do  they  huddle  up  together  those  very  many  express 
testimonies  of  the  truth  we  plead  for,  which  are  recorded  in 
the  Scripture.  Of  which  I  may  clearly  say,  that  I  know  no 
one  truth  in  the  whole  Scripture,  that  is  so  freely  and  fully 
delivered  ;  as  being  indeed  of  the  greatest  importance  to  oui 
souls.  What  they  except  in  particular  against  any  one  of 
the  testimonies  that  may  be  referred  to  the  heads  before  re- 
counted (except  those  which  have  been  already  spoken  to), 
shall  be  considered  in  the  order  wherein  they  proceed. 

They  say  then, 

*  For'  what  belongeth  unto  those  testimonies  wherein  it 
is  contended  that  Christ  died  for  us,  it  is  manifest  that  sa- 
tisfaction cannot  necessarily  be  therein  asserted,  because 
the  Scripture  witnesseth  that  we  ought  even  to  lay  down 
our  lives  for  the  brethren;  1  John  iii.  16.  And  Paul  writes 
of  himself.  Col.  i.  14.  'Now  I  rejoice  in  my  affliction  for 
you,  and  fill  up  the  remainder  of  the  affliction  of  Christ  for 
his  body  which  is  the  church.'  But  it  is  certain,  that  nei- 
ther do  believers  satisfy  for  any  of  the  brethren ;  nor  did 
Paul  make  satisfaction  to  any  for  the  church. 

*Q.  23.  What  then  is  the  sense  of  these  words,  'Christ 
died  for  us  ? 

*  That  these  words,  '  for  us,'  do  not  signify  in  our  place 

aut  dedit  semetipsum  et  aniinam  suam  redeiiiptionein  pro  miiltis  :  turn  quod  noster 
Mediator  est.  Porro  quod  nos  rcconciliarit  Deo,  et  sit  propitiatio  pro  peccatis  nos- 
tris ;  Denique  ex  illis  sacrificiis,quae  raortura  Christi,seufigur?e  adumbraverunt. 

i  Quod  attinet  ad  ilia  testimonia  in  quibus  habetur  Christum  pro  nobis  mortuuni, 
ex  lis  satisfactionem  adstrui  necessario  noa  posse  hinc  manifestuni  est,  quod  Scrip- 
tura  testetur,  etiara  nos  pro  fratribus  animas  ponere  debere,  1  John  iii.  16.  et  Paulus 
de  se  scribat,  Col.  i.  24.  nunc  gaudeo  &c.  Certum  autem  est,  nee  fideles  pro  fratri- 
bus cuiquam  satisfacere,  neque  Paulum  cniquam  pro  ecclesia  satisfecisse. 

At  horum  verborum,  Christum  pro  nobis  esse  mortuura,  qui  sensus  est.' — Is,  quid 
haec  verba  [pro  nobis]  non  significent  loco  vel  vice  nostri,  varum  propter  nos,  uti 
etiam  Apostolus  expresse  loquitur,  1  Cor.  viii.  11.  Quod  etiam  similia  verba  indi- 
cant, cum  Scriptura  loquitur,  pro  peccatis  nostris  mortuuni  esse  Christum;  quee 
verba  eum  sensum  habere  nequeunt,  loco  seu  vice  nostrorum  peccatorura  mortuum 
esse ;  verum  propter  peccata  nostra  esse  mortuum  ;  uti  Rom.  iv.  25.  raanifeste  Scrip- 
turn  legiraus.  Ea  porro  verba  (Christum  pro  nobis  mortuum  esse)  banc  habent  vim, 
eum  idcirco  mortuuni,  utnos  salutem  aeternam,  quam  is  nobis  cajlitus  attulit  ampice- 
teretnur,  et  consequeraur,  quod  qua  ratione  fiat,  paulo  superius  accepisti. 


190  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHItlST. 

or  stead,  but  for  us,  as  the  apostle  expressly  speaks,  1  Cor. 
viii.  11.  which  also  alike  places  do  shew,  where  the  Scrip- 
ture saith,  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins ;  which  word  cannot 
have  this  sense,  that  Christ  died  instead  of  our  sins,  but 
that  he  died  for  our  sins,  as  it  is  expressly  written,  Rom. 
iv.  25.  Moreover  these  words,  '  Christ  died  for  us,'  have 
this  sense,  that  he  therefore  died,  that  we  might  em- 
brace and  obtain  that  eternal  salvation  which  he  brought 
to  us  from  heaven,  which  how  it  is  done  you  heard  be- 
fore.' 

A?is.  Briefly  to  state  the  difference  between  us  about 
the  meaning  of  this  expression  '  Christ  died  for  us,'  I  shall 
give  one  or  two  observations  upon  what  they  deliver,  then 
confirm  the  common  faith,  and  remove  their  exceptions 
thereto. 

1.  Without  any  attempt  of  proof  they  oppose  '  vice  nos- 
tri,' and  'propter  nos,'  as  contrary  and  inconsistent;  and 
make  this  their  argument,  that  Christ  did  not  die  '  vice  nos- 
tri,'  because  he  died  '  propter  nos.'  When  it  is  one  argu- 
ment whereby  we  prove  that  Christ  died  in  our  stead,  be- 
cause he  died  for  us,  in  the  sense  mentioned,  1  Cor.  viii.  11. 
where  it  is  expressed  by  ^la,  because  we  could  no  otherwise 
be  brought  to  the  end  aimed  at. 

2.  Our  sense  of  the  expression  is  evident  from  what  we 
insist  upon,  in  the  doctrine  in  hand.  '  Christ  died  for  vis  ;' 
that  is,  he  underwent  the  death  and  curse  that  was  due  to 
us,  that  we  might  be  delivered  therefrom. 

3.  The  last  words  of  the  catechists  are  those  wherein 
they  strive  to  hide  the  abomination  of  their  hearts  in  refer- 
ence to  this  business.     I  shall  a  little  lay  it  open. 

1.  Christ,  say  they,  'brought  us  eternal  salvation  from 
heaven;'  that  is,  'he  preached  a  doctrine  in  obedience 
whereunto,  we  may  obtain  salvation.'     So  did  Paul. 

2.  '  He  died  that  we  might  receive  it;'  that  is,  rather  than 
he  would  deny  the  truth  which  he  preached,  he  suffered 
himself  to  be  put  to  death.  So  did  Paul;  and  yet  he  was 
not  crucified  for  the  church. 

3.  It  is  not  indeed  the  death  of  Christ,  but  his  resurrec- 
tion that  hath  an  influence  into  our  receiving;  of  his  doctrine, 
and  so  our  obtaining  salvation.  And  this  is  the  sense  of 
these  words,  'Christ  died  for  us.' 


OF    THE    .SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  I9t 

For  the  confirmation  of  our  faith  from  this  expression, 
*  Christ  died  for  us,'  we  have, 

1.  The  common  sense,  and  customary  usage  of  human 
kind  as  to  this  expression.  Whenever  one  is  in  danger,  and 
another  is  said  to  come  and  die  for  him,  that  he  may  be  de- 
livered, a  substitution  is  still  understood.  The  avrb^vxo'-  of 
old,  as  Damon  and  Pythias,  &c.  make  this  manifest. 

2.  The  common  usage  of  this  expression  in  Scripture 
confirms  the  sense  insisted  on.  So  David  wished  that  he 
had  died  for  his  son  Absolora,  that  is,  'died  in  his  stead,'  that 
he  might  have  lived  ;  2  Sam,  xviii.  33.  And  that  supposal 
of  Paul,  Rom,  i.  11.  of  one  daring  to  die  for  a  good  man, 
relating  (as  by  all  expositors  on  the  place  is  evinced)  to  the 
practice  of  some  in  former  days,  who  to  deliver  others  from 
death,  had  given  themselves  up  to  that  whereunto  they  were 
obnoxious,  confirms  the  same, 

3.  The  phrase  itself,  of  airi^avi^  or  cnriQaviv  inrlp  rifiCJv, 
which  is  used,  Heb.  ii.  9.  1  Pet.  i,  2L  Rom,  v.  6-8.  2  Cor. 
V.  14,  sufl[iciently  proves  our  intention,  compared  with  the 
use  of  the  preposition  in  other  places  ;  especially  being  far- 
ther explained  by  the  use  of  the  preposition  dvri,  which  ever 
denotes  a  substitution,  in  the  same  sense  and  business. 
Matt.  XX.  28,  X.  45,  1  Tim.  ii.  that  a  substitution  and 
commutation  is  always  denoted  by  this  preposition  (if  not 
an  opposition  which  here  can  have  no  place);  1  Pet,  iii,  9. 
Rom,  xii.  14,  Matt,  v.  38.  Luke  xi.  13.  Heb.  xii.  16.  1  Cor. 
xi.  15,  amongst  other  places  are  sufficient  evidences. 

4.  Christ  is  so  said  to  die  avrl  ijjuwv,  so  as  that  he  is  said 
in  his  death  to  have  '  our  iniquities  laid  upon  him/  to  '  bear 
our  sin  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,'  to  be  made  sin  and  a 
curse  for  us,  to  oflTer  himself  a  '  sacrifice  for  us,'  by  his  death, 
his  blood,  to  pay  a  price  or  ransom  for  us,  to  redeem,  to 
reconcile  us  to  God,  to  do  away  our  sins  in  his  blood,  to 
free  us  from  wrath,  and  condemnation,  and  sin.  Now  whe- 
ther thus  to  '  die  for  us,'  be  not  to  die  in  our  place  and  stead, 
let  angels  and  men  judge, 

5.  But,  say  they,  this  is  all  that  we  have  to  say  in  this 
business,  'Yet  we  ought  to  lay  down  our  lives  for  the  bre- 
thren ;'  and  Paul  saith, '  that  he  filled  up  the  measure  of  the 
affliction  of  Christ,  for  his  body's  sake  the  church,'  but  nei- 


192  OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST. 

ther  the  one,  nor  the  other  did  make  satisfaction  to  God  by 
their  death,  or  affliction.     But, 

1.  If  all  we  had  to  plead  for  the  sense  of  this  expression, 
'  Christ  died  for  us,'  depended  solely  on  the  sense  and  use 
of  that  word  virlp,  then  the  exception  would  have  this  force 
in  it.  The  word  is  once  or  twice  used  in  another  sense, 
in  another  business  ;  therefore  the  sense  of  it  contended  for 
in  this  business,  cannot  be  such  as  you  seek  to  maintain. 
But, 

1.  This  exception  at  best,  in  a  cause  of  this  importance, 
is  most  frivolous,  and  tends  to  the  disturbance  of  all  sober 
interpretation  of  Scripture. 

2.  We  are  very  far  from  making  the  single  sense  of  the 
preposition,  to  be  the  medium,  which  in  the  argument  from 
the  whole  expression  we  insist  on. 

2.  The  passage  in  1  John  iii.  16.  being  a  part  of  the  apo- 
stles persuasive  to  love,  charity,  and  the  fruits  of  them, 
tending  to  the  relief  of  the  brethren,  in  poverty  and  distress, 
disclaims  all  intendment  and  possibility  of  a  substitution  or 
commutation,  nor  hath  any  intimation  of  undergoing  that 
which  was  due  to  another,  but  only  of  being  ready  to  the 
utmost  to  assist  and  relieve  them.  The  same  is  the  condi- 
tion of  what  is  affirmed  of  Paul ;  of  the  measure  of  affliction, 
which  in  the  infinite  wise  providence,  and  fatherly  care  of 
God,  is  proportioned  to  the  mystical  body  of  Christ's 
church,  Paul  underwent  his  share  for  the  good  of  the  whole. 
But  that  Paul,  that  any  believers  were  crucified  for  the 
church,  or  died  for  it,  in  the  sense  that  Christ  died  for  it, 
that  they  redeemed  it  to  God  by  their  own  blood,  it  is  noto- 
rious blasphemy  once  to  imagine.  The  meaning  of  the 
phrase,  *  He  died  for  our  sins,'  was  before  explained.  Christ 
then  dying  for  us,  'being  made  sin  for  us,' '  bearing  our  ini- 
quity,' and  'redeeming  us  by  his  blood,'  died  in  our  place 
and  stead,  and  by  his  death  made  satisfaction  to  God  for 
our  sin. 

Also  that  Christ  made  satisfaction  for  our  sin,  appears 
from  hence,  that  he  was  our  Mediator.  Concerning  this, 
after  their  attempt  against  proper  redemption  by  his 
blood,  which  we  have  already  considered,  Q.  28.  they 
inquire, 


OF    THE    SATISFACTION    OF    CHRIST.  193 

'  Q.  What*"  say  you  to  this,  that  Christ  is  the  Mediator 
the  new  covenant  between  God  and  man  ?  and  answer. 

*  A.  Seeing  it  is  read,  that  Moses  was  a  mediator.  Gal. 
iii.  19.  (namely  of  the  old  covenant  between  God  and  the 
people  of  Israel)  and  it  is  evident,  that  he  no  way  made  sa- 
tisfaction to  God ;  neither  from  hence,  that  Christ  is  the 
Mediator  of  God  and  man,  can  it  be  certainly  gathered,  that 
he  made  any  satisfaction  to  God  for  our  sin.' 

I  shall  take  leave  before  I  proceed,  to  make  a  return  of 
this  argument  to  them  from  whom  it  comes,  by  a  mere  change 
of  the  instance  given.  Christ,  they  say,  our  high-priest,  of- 
fered himself  to  God  in  heaven.  Now  Aaron  is  expressly 
said  to  be  a  high-priest,  and  yet  he  did  not  offer  himself  in 
heaven,  and  therefore  it  cannot  be  certainly  proved,  that 
Christ  offered  himself  in  heaven,  because  he  was  a  high- 
priest.  Or  thus  :  David  was  a  king,  and  a  type  of  Christ ; 
but  David  reigned  at  Jerusalem,  and  was  a  temporal  king  : 
it  cannot  therefore  be  proved,  that  Christ  is  a  spiritual  king 
from  hence,  that  he  is  said  to  be  a  king.  This  argument  I 
confess  Faustus  Socinus  could  not  answer  when  it  was  urged 
against  him  by  Sidelius.  But  for  the  former,  I  doubt  not 
but  Smalcius  would  quickly  have  answered,  that  it  is  true ; 
it  cannot  be  necessarily  proved,  that  Christ  offereth  himself 
in  heaven,  because  he  was  a  high-priest,  which  Aaron  was 
also,  but  because  he  was  such  a  high-priest,  as  entered  into 
the  heavens  to  appear  personally  in  the  presence  of  God  for 
us,  as  he  is  described  to  be.  Until  he  can  give  us  a  better 
answer  to  our  argument,  I  hope  he  will  be  content  with  this 
of  ours  to  his.  It  is  true,  it  doth  not  appear,  nor  can  be 
evinced  necessarily,  that  Christ  made  satisfaction  for  us  to 
God,  because  he  was  a  mediator  in  general,  for  so  Moses 
was  who  made  no  satisfaction;  but  because  it  is  said,  that 
he  was  such  a  mediator  between  God  and  man,  as  gave  his 
life  a  price  of  redemption  for  them  for  whom  with  God  he 
mediated,  1  Tim.  ii,  6.  it  is  most  evident  and  undeniable  ; 
and  hereunto  Smalcius  is  silent. 

What  remains  of  this  chapter  in  the  catechists,  hath  been 

^  Quid  ad  hasc  dicis,  quod  Christus  sit  Mediator  inter  Deuiu  et  homines,  aut  N. 
foederis? — Cum  legatur  Moses  fuisse  Mediator,  Gal.  iii.  19.  (puta inter  Deumet  jio- 
pulum  Israel  aut  prisci  foederis)  neque  cum  satisfecisse  Deo  ullo  modo  constet,  ne 
hinc  quidem  quod  mediator  Dei  et  hominura  Cbristus  sit,  colligi  certo  poterit,  eum 
satisfactionem  aliquani,  qua  Deo  pro  peccatls  nostris  satisfieret  peregissc. 


194       OF    UNIVERSAL    GllACE    AND    ELECTION. 

already  fully  considered ;  so  to  them  and  Mr.  B.  as  to  his 
12th  chapter  about  the  death  of  Christ,  what  hath  been  said 
may  suffice.  Many  weighty  considerations  of  the  death  of 
Christ  in  this  whole  discourse,  I  confess  are  omitted  ;  and 
yet  more  perhaps  have  been  delivered,  than  by  our  adver- 
saries' occasion  hath  been  administered  unto.  But  this  bu- 
siness is  the  very  centre  of  the  new  covenant,  and  cannot 
sufficiently  be  weighed.  God  assisting,  a  farther  attempt 
will  ere  long  be  made  for  the  brief  stating  all  the  several 
concernments  of  it. 


CHAP.  XXXI. 

Of  election  and  universal  grace :  Of  the  resurrection  of  C/mst 
from  the  dead. 

Mr  Biddle's  intention  in  this  13th  chapter,  being  to  decry 
God's  eternal  election,  finding  himself  destitute  of  any  Scrip- 
ture that  should  to  the  least  outward  appearance  speak  to 
his  purpose,  he  deserts  the  way  and  method  of  procedure 
imposed  on  himself,  and  in  the  very  entrance  falls  into  a  dis- 
pute against  it,  with  such  arguments  as  the  texts  of  Scrip- 
ture after-mentioned,  give  not  the  least  colour  or  counte- 
nance unto.  Not  that  from  me  he  incurs  any  blame  for  using 
any  arguments  whereby  he  supposeth  he  may  further  or  pro- 
mote his  cause,  is  this  spoken ;  but  having  at  the  entrance 
professed  against  such  a  procedure,  he  ought  not  upon  any 
necessity  to  have  transgressed  the  law,  which  to  himself  he 
had  prescribed.  But  as  the  matter  stands,  he  is  to  be  heard 
to  the  full,  in  what  he  hath  to  offer.  Thus  then  he  pro- 
ceeds : 

'  Q.  Those  Scriptures  which  you  have  already  alleged, 
when  I  enquired  for  whom  Christ  died,  intimate  the  univer- 
sality of  God's  love  to  men  :  yet,  forasmuch  as  this  is  a  point 
of  the  greatest  importance,  without  the  knowledge  and  belief 
whereof,  we  cannot  have  any  true  and  solid  ground  of 
coming  unto  God  (because  if  he  from  eternity  intended  good 
only  to  a  few,  and  those  few  are  not  set  down  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, which  were  written,  that  we  through  the  comfort  of 


OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION.         195 

them  might  have  hope,  no  man  can  certainly,  yea,  probably 
infer,  that  he  is  in  the  number  of  those  few,  the  contrary 
being  ten  thousand  to  one  more  likely) ;  what  other  clear  pas- 
sages of  Scripture  have  you,  which  shew,  that  God,  in  send- 
ing Christ,  and  proposing  the  gospel,  aimed  not  at  the  sal- 
vation of  a  certain  elect  number,  but  of  men  in  general? 

'A.  John  iii.  16,  17.  vi.  33.  iv.  42.  1  John  iv.  14.  John 
xii.  46,  47.  Mark  xvi.  15,  16.  Col.  i.  22.  i.  18.  1  Tim.  ii.  1 
—3.  2  Pet.  iii.  9.  2  Cor.  v.  19.  1  Johnii.  I,  2.' 

1.  That  God  is  good  to  all  men,  and  bountiful,  being  a 
wise,  powerful,  liberal  provider  for  the  works  of  his  hands, 
in  and  by  innumerable  dispensations,  and  various  communi- 
cations of  his  goodness  to  them;  and  may  in  that  regard, 
be  said  to  have  a  universal  love  for  them  all,  is  granted. 
But  that  God  loveth  all,  and  every  man  alike,  with  that  eter- 
nal love,  which  is  the  fountain  of  his  giving  Christ  for  them, 
and  to  them,  and  all  good  things  with  him,  is  not  in  the 
least  intimated  by  any  of  those  places  of  Scripture,  where 
they  are  expressed  for  whom  Christ  died  ;  as  elsewhere  hath 
been  abundantly  manifested. 

2.  It  is  confessed,  that  this  is  a  point  of  the  greatest  im- 
portance (that  is,  of  very  great),  without  the  knowledge  and 
belief  whereof  we  cannot  have  any  true  and  solid  ground  of 
coming  unto  God;  namely,  of  the  love  of  God  in  Christ;  but 
that  to  know  the  universality  of  his  love  is  of  such  import- 
ance, cannot  be  proved,  unless  that  can  be  numbered  which 
is  wanting,  and  that  weighed  in  the  balance  which  is  not. 

3.  We  say  not,  that  God  from  all  eternity  intended  good 
only  to  a  few.  See.  He  intended  much  good  to  all,  and 
every  man  in  the  world,  and  accordingly  in  abundance  of 
variety  accomplisheth  that  his  intention  towards  them  ;  to 
some  in  a  greater,  to  some  in  a  lesser  measure,  according  as 
seems  good  to  his  infinite  wisdom  and  pleasure,  for  *  which 
all  things  were  made  and  created  ;'  Rev.  iv.  11.  And  for  that 
particular  eminent  good  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ,  for  the 
praise  of  his  glorious  grace,  we  do  not  say  that  he  intended 
that  from  eternity,  for  a  few  absolutely  considered;  for 
these  will  appear  in  the  issue  to  be  a  *  great  multitude, 
which  no  man  can  number;'  Rev.  vii.  9.  but  that  in  compa- 
rison of  them  who  shall  everlastingly  come  short  of  liis 
glory,  we  say  that  they  are  but  a '  little  flock,'  yea,  '  few  they 


196      OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION. 

are  that  are  chosen/  as  our  Saviour  expressly  affirms,  what- 
ever Mr.  B.  be  pleased  to  tell  us  to  the  contrary. 

4.  That  the  granting  that  they  are  but  few  that  are 
chosen  (though  many  be  called),  and  that  'before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  v^^orld'  some  are  chosen  to  be  holy  and  un- 
blameable  in  love  through  Christ,  having  their  '  names 
written  in  the  book  of  life,'  is  a  discouragement  to  any  to 
come  to  God,  Mr.  B.  shall  persuade  us,  when  he  can  evince 
that  the  secret  and  eternal  purpose  of  God's  discriminating 
between  persons,  as  to  their  eternal  conditions,  is  the  great 
ground  and  bottom  of  our  approach  unto  God  ;  and  not  the 
truth  and  faithfulness  of  the  promises  which  he  hath  given, 
with  his  holy  and  righteous  commands.  The  issue  that  lies 
before  them  who  are  commanded  to  draw  nigh  to  God  is,  not 
whether  they  are  elected  or  no,  but  whether  they  will  believe 
or  no,  God  having  given  them  eternal  and  unchangeable 
rules;  'He  that  believes  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  belives 
not,  shall  be  damned;'  though  no  man's  name  be  written  in 
the  Scripture,  he  that  believes  hath  the  faith  of  God's  ve- 
racity, to  assure  him  that  he  shall  be  saved.  It  is  a  most 
vain  surmisal,  that  as  to  that  obedience  which  God  requires 
of  us,  there  is  any  obstruction  laid  by  this  consideration, 
that  they  are  but  few  which  are  chosen. 

5.  This  is  indeed  the  only  true  and  solid  ground  of  coming 
unto  God  by  Christ,  that  God  hath  infallibly  conjoined  faith 
and  salvation,  so  that  whosoever  believes  shall  be  saved  ; 
neither  doth  the  granting  of  the  pretended  universality  of 
God's  love,  afford  any  other  ground  whatever ;  and  this  is 
not  in  the  least  shaken  or  impaired  by  the  effectual  love  and 
purpose  of  God  for  the  salvation  of  some.  And  if  Mr.  B. 
hath  any  other  true  and  solid  ground  of  encouraging  men  to 
come  to  God  by  Christ,  besides  and  beyond  this  which  may 
not  on  one  account  or  other,  be  educed  from  it  or  resolved 
into  it(I  mean  of  God's  command  and  promise),  I  do  here  beg 
of  him  to  acquaint  me  with  it,  and  I  shall  give  him  more 
thanks  for  it,  if  I  live  to  see  it  done,  than  as  yet  I  can  per- 
suade myself  to  do  on  the  account  of  all  his  other  labours 
which  I  have  seen. 

6.  We  say,  though  God  hath  chosen  some  only  to  sal- 
vation by  Christ,  yet  that  the  names  of  those  some  are  not 
expressed  in  Scripture  ;  the  doing  whereof  would  have  been 


OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION.        197 

destructive  to  the  main  end  of  the  word,  the  nature  of  faith, 
and  all  the  ordinances  of  the  gospel ;  yet  God  having  de- 
clared that  whosoever  believeth  shall  be  saved,  there  is  suf- 
ficient ground  for  all  and  every  man  in  the  world,  to  whom 
the  gospel  is  preached,  to  come  to  God  by  Christ,  and  other 
ground  there  is  none,  nor  can  be  offered  by  the  assertors  of 
the  pretended  universality  of  God's  love.  Nor  is  this  pro- 
position, '  he  that  believes  shall  be  saved/  founded  on  the 
universality  of  love  pleaded  for,  but  the  sufficiency  of  the 
means  for  the  accomplishment  of  what  is  therein  asserted : 
namely,  the  blood  of  Christ,  who  is  believed  on. 

Now  because  Mr.  B.  expresseth,  that  the  end  of  his  as- 
serting this  universality  of  God's  love,  is  to  decry  his  eternal 
purpose  of  election ;  it  being  confessed  that  between  these 
two,  there  is  an  inconsistency  :  without  entering  far  into 
that  controversy,  I  shall  briefly  shew  what  the  Scripture 
speaks  to  the  latter,  and  how  remote  the  places  mentioned 
by  Mr.  B.  are,  from  giving  countenance  to  the  former  in  the 
sense  wherein  by  him  who  asserts  it  it  is  understood. 

For  the  first,  methinks  a  little  respect  and  reverence  to 
that  testimony  of  our  Saviour,  '  many  are  called,  but  few 
are  chosen,'  might  have  detained  this  gentleman  from  as- 
serting with  so  much  confidence,  that  the  persuasion  of" 
God's  choosing  but  a  few,  is  an  obstruction  of  men's  coming 
unto  God.  Though  he  looks  upon  our  blessed  Saviour  as 
a  mere  man,  yet  I  hope,  he  takes  him  for  a  true  man,  and  one 
that  taught  the  way  of  God  aright.  But  a  little  farther  to 
clear  this  matter. 

1.  Some  are  chosen  from  eternity,  and  are  under  the  pur- 
pose of  God,  as  to  the  good  mentioned.  2.  Those  some,  are 
some  only,  not  all ;  and  therefore  as  to  the  good  intended, 
there  is  not  a  universal  love  in  God,  us  to  the  objects  of  it, 
but  such  a  distinguishing  one  as  is  spoken  against.  Eph.  i. 
4,  5.  '  According  as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy,  and  with- 
out blame  before  him  in  love :  having  predestinated  us  to  the 
adoption  of  children  by  Jesus  Christ  to  himself,  according 
to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will.'  Here  are  some  chosen,  and 
consequently  an  intention  of  God  concerning  them,  express- 
ed ;  and  this  from  eternity,  or  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world;  and  this  to  the  good  of  holiness,  adoption,  salvation; 


198       OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION. 

and  this  is  only  of  some,  and  not  of  all  the  world,  as  the 
whole  tenor  of  the  discourse  being  referred  to  believers, 
doth  abundantly  manifest. 

Rom.  viii.  28 — 30.  *  And  we  know,  that  all  things  work 
together  for  good,  to  them  that  are  the  called  according  to 
his  purpose.  For  whom  he  did  foreknow,  he  also  did  pre- 
destinate to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he 
might  be  the  firstborn  amongst  many  brethren.  Moreover, 
whom  he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called :  and  whom 
he  called,  them  he  also  justified  :  and  whom  he  justified, 
them  he  also  glorified.*  The  good  here  intended  is  glory, 
that  the  apostle  closes  withal ;  '  whom  he  justified,  them  he 
also  glorified.'  The  means  of  that  end,  consists  in  vocation 
and  justification  :  the  persons  to  be  made  partakers  of  this 
end,  are  not  all  the  world,  but  the  *  called  according  to  his 
purpose;'  the  designation  of  them  so  distinguished,  to  the 
end  expressed,  is  from  the  purpose,  foreknowledge,  and  pre- 
destination of  God,  that  is,  his  everlasting  intention.  Were 
it  another  man,  with  whom  we  have  to  do,  I  should  wonder 
that  it  came  into  his  mind,  to  deny  this  eternal  intention  of 
God  towards  some  for  good ;  but  nothing  is  strange  from  the 
gentlemen  of  our  present  contest.  They  are  but  some  which 
are  '  ordained  to  eternal  life  ;'  Acts  xiii.  48.  but  some,  that 
are  '  given  to  Christ :'  John  xvii.  6.  *  A  remnant  according  to 
election  ;'  Rom.  xi.  5.  one  being  chosen,  when  another  was 
rejected,  before  *  they  were  born,  or  had  done  either  good  or 
evil,  that  the  purpose  of  God,  according  to  election  might 
stand;'  Rom.  ix.  11,  12.  and  those  who  attain  salvation,  are 
'  chosen  thereunto,  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit,  and 
belief  of  the  truth ;'  2  Thess.  ii.  13.  All  that  is  intended  by 
them,  whom  Mr.  B.  thinketh  to  load  with  the  opinion  he 
rejects,  is  but  what  in  these  and  many  other  places  of  Scrip- 
ture, is  abundantly  revealed.  God  from  all  eternity,  accord- 
ing to  the  purpose  of  his  own  will,  or  the  purpose  which  is 
according  to  election,  hath  chosen  some,  and  appointed 
them  to  the  obtaining  of  life  and  salvation  by  Christ,  to  the 
praise  of  his  glorious  grace.  For  the  number  of  these,  be 
they  few  or  more,  in  comparison  of  the  rest  of  the  w^orld,  the 
event  doth  manifest. 

Yet  farther  to  evidence  that  this  purpose  of  God,  or  in- 
tention spoken  of,  is  peculiar  and  distinguishing,  there  is  ex- 


OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION.        199 

press  mention  of  another  sort  of  men,  who  are  not  thus 
chosen,  but  lie  under  the  purpose  of  God,  as  to  a  contrary- 
lot  and  condition.  '  The  Lord  hath  made  all  things  for  him- 
self; yea,  even  the  wicked  for  the  day  of  evil;'  Prov.  xvi.  4. 
They  are  persons,  'whose  names  are  not  written  in  the 
Lamb's  book  of  life ;'  Rev.  xiii.  8.  '  Being  of  old  ordained 
to  condemnation;'  Jude  iv.  being  as  'natural  brute  beasts, 
made  to  be  taken  and  destroyed  ;'  2  Pet.  ii.  12.  And  there- 
fore, the  apostle  distinguisheth  all  men  into  those  who  '  are 
appointed  to  wrath/  and  those  who  are  appointed  to  the 
obtaining  of  life  by  Jesus  Christ;  1  Thess.  v.  9.  An  in- 
stance of  which  eternally  discriminating  purpose  of  God,  is 
given  in  Jacob  and  Esau,  Rom.  ix.  11,  12.  which  way  and 
procedure  therein  of  God,  the  apostle  vindicates  from  all 
appearance  of  unrighteousness,  and  stops  the  mouths  of  all 
repiners  against  it,  from  the  sovereignty  and  absolute  li- 
berty of  his  will,  in  dealing  with  all  the  sons  of  men  as  he 
pleaseth ;  ver.  14 — 21.  Concluding  that  in  opposition  to 
them,  whom  God  hath  made  '  vessels  of  mercy,  prepared 
unto  glory;'  there  are  also  *  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  destruc- 
tion ;'  ver.  22,  23. 

Moreover,  in  all  eminent  effects  and  fruits  of  love,  in  all 
the  issues  and  ways  of  it,  for  the  good  of,  and  towards  the 
sons  of  men,  God  abundantly  manifests,  that  his  eternal 
love,  that  regards  the  everlasting  good  of  men,  as  it  was  be- 
fore described,  is  peculiar,  and  not  universally  comprehen- 
sive of  all,  and  every  one  of  mankind. 

In  the  pursuit  of  that  love,  he  gave  his  Son  to  die ;  'For 
God  commendeth  his  love  to  us,  in  that  whilst  we  were  yet 
sinners,  Christ  died  for  us;'  Rom.  v.  8.  '  Herein  is  love,  not 
that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son 
to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins;'  1  John  iv.  10.  Now 
though  he  died  not  for  the  Jews  only,  but  for  all,  for  the 
whole  world,  or  men  throughout  the  whole  world,  yet  that 
he  died  for  some  only  of  all  sorts  throughout  the  world,  even 
those  who  are  so  chosen,  as  is  before-mentioned,  and  not  for 
them  who  are  rejected,  as  was  above  declared,  himself  testi- 
fies; Johnxvii.  9.  '  I  pray  for  them,  I  pray  not  for  the  world, 
but  for  them  which  thou  hast  given  me,  thine  they  were,  and 
thou  gavest  them  me ;'  ver.  6.  '  And  for  their  sakes  I  sanc- 
tify myself;'  ver.  17.     Even  as  he  had  said  before,  that  he 


200       OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION. 

came  to  give  his  life  *  a  ransom  for  many ;'  Matt.  xx.  28. 
which  Paul  afterward  abundantly  confirms  ;  affirming,  that 
God  *  redeemed  his  church  with  his  own  blood  ;'  Acts  xx. 
28.  Not  the  world,  as  contradistinguished  from  his  church, 
nor  absolutely;  but  his  church  throughout  the  world.  And 
to  give  us  a  clearer  insight  into  his  intendment,  in  naming 
the  church  in  this  business,  he  tells  us,  they  are  God's  elect 
whom  he  means;  Rom.  viii.  32 — 34.  'He  that  spared  not  his 
Son,  but  delivered  him  up  to  death  for  us  all,  how  shall  he 
not  with  him,  freely  give  us  all  things  ?  Who  shall  lay  any 
thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  It  is  God  that  justifieth: 
Who  is  he  that  condemneth  ?  It  is  Christ  that  died,  yea,  ra- 
ther that  is  risen  again,  who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of  God, 
who  also  maketh  intercession  for  us.'  They  are  the  elect 
for  whom  God  gave  his  Son,  and  that  out  of  his  love,  which 
the  apostle  eminently  sets  out  ver.  32.  those  to  whom  with 
his  Son  he  gives  all  things,  and  who  shall  on  that  account 
never  be  separated  from  him. 

Farther,  to  manifest  that  this  great  fruit  and  effect  of  the 
love  of  God,  which  is  extended  to  the  whole  object  of  that 
love,  was  not  universal.  1.  The  promise  of  giving  him  was 
not  so ;  God  promised  Christ  to  all,  for  and  to  whom  he 
giveth  him.  *  The  Lord  God  of  Israel  by  him  visited  and 
redeemed  his  people,  raising  up  a  horn  of  salvation  for  them 
in  the  house  of  his  servant  David,  as  he  spake  by  the  mouth 
of  his  holy  prophets,  which  have  been  since  the  world  be- 
gan ;'  Luke  i.  68 — 70.  In  the  very  first  promise  of  him,  the 
seed  of  the  serpent  (as  are  all  reprobate  unbelievers)  are  ex- 
cluded from  any  interest  therein;  Gen.  iii.  15.  And  it  was 
renewed  again,  not  to  all  the  world,  but  to  'Abraham  and 
his  seed;'  Gen.  xii.  2,  3.  Acts  ii.  39.  iii.  25.  And  for  many 
ages,  the  promise  was  so  appropriated  to  the  '  seed  of  Abra- 
ham ;'  Rom.  ix.  5.  with  some  few,  that  joined  themselves  to 
them,  Isa.  Ivi.  3 — 5.  that  the  people  of  God  prayed  for  a 
curse  on  the  residue  of  the  world,  Jer.  x.  25.  as  they  which 
were  '  strangers  from  the  covenant  of  promise  ;'  Eph.  ii.  12. 
they  belonged  not  to  them.  So  that  God  made  not  a  promise 
of  Christ  to  the  universality  of  mankind  ;  which  sufficiently 
evinceth,  that  it  was  not  from  a  universal,  but  a  peculiar 
love  that  he  was  given.     Nor 

2.  When  Christ  was  exhibited  in  the  flesh,  according  to 


OF     UNIVERSAL     GRACE    AND    ELECTION.       201 

the  promise,  was  he  given  to  all,  but  to  the  church;  Isa.  ix.  6. 
neither  really  as  to  their  good ;  nor  ministerially  for  the  pro- 
mulgation of  the  gospel  to  any,  but  to  the  Jews.  And  there- 
fore, when  he  came  to  his  own,  though  his  '  own  received 
him  not ;'  John  i.  11.  yet,  as  to  the  ministry  which  he  was  to 
accomplish,  he  professed  he  was  not  '  sent  but  to  the  lost 
sheep  of  Israel ;'  and  gives  order  to  them  whom  he  sent  forth 
to  preach  in  his  own  lifetime,  not  to  go  into  the  '  way  of  the 
Gentiles,  nor  to  enter  into  any  city  of  the  Samaritans  ;'  Matt. 
X.  5.  yea,  when  he  had  been  lifted  up,  to  draw  all  men  to  him, 
John  iii.  14.   and   chap.  xii.  32.  and   being  ascended  had 
broken  down  the  partition  wall,  and  took  away  all  distinc- 
tion of  Jew  and  Gentile,  circumcision  and  uncircumcision, 
having  died  not  only  for  that  nation  of  the  Jews,  (for  the 
remnant  of  them  according  to  the  election  of  grace,  Rom.  xi.) 
but  that  he  'might  gather  together  in  one  the  children  of 
God'  that  were  scattered  abroad ;  John  xi.  52.  whence  the 
language  and  expressions  of  the  Scripture  as  to  the  people 
of  God  are  changed,  and  instead  of  Judah  and  Israel,  they 
are  expressed  by  the  '  world;'  John  iii.  16.  the  'whole  world,' 
1  John  ii.  1,  2.  and  '  all  men ;'  1  Tim.  iv.  6.  in  opposition  to 
the  Jews  only,  some  of  all  sorts  being  now  taken  into  grace 
and  favour  with  God  ;  yet  neither  then  doth  he  do  what  did 
remain,  for  the  full  administration  of  the  covenant  of  grace 
towards  all ;  namely,  the  pouring  out  of  his  Spirit  with  effi- 
cacy of  power  to  bring  them  into  subjection  to  him;  but 
still  carries  on,  though  in  a  greater  extent  and  latitude,  a 
work    of   distinguishing    love,    taking   some    and    refusing 
others.     So  that  being   'exalted,  and  made  a  Prince  and  a 
Saviour,'  he  gives  not  repentance  to  all  the  world,  but  to 
them  whom  he  redeemed  to  God  by  his  blood,  out  of  every 
*  kindred  and  tongue  and  people  and  nation ;'  Rev.  v.  9. 

It  appears  then,  from  the  consideration  of  this  first  most 
eminent  effect  of  the  love  of  God,  in  all  the  concernments  of 
it,  that  that  love,  which  is  the  foundation  of  all  the  grace 
and  glory,  of  all  the  spiritual  and  eternal  good  things, 
whereof  the  sons  of  men  are  made  partakers,  is  not  universal, 
but  peculiar  and  distinguishing. 

Mr.  Biddle  being  to  prove  his  former  assertion  of  the 
universality  of  God's  love,  mei:tions  sundry  places,  where 
God  is  said  to  love  the  world,  and  to  send  his  Son  to  K-  the 

VOL.    IX.  p 


202       OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION. 

Saviour,  of  the  world  ;  John  iii.  16,  17.  vi.  33.  iv.  42.  1  John 
iv.  14.  Johnxii.  46,47.  1  John  ii.  1,  2.  The  reason  of  which 
expression  the  reader  was  before  acquainted  with.  The  bene- 
fits of  the  death  of  Christ  being  now  no  more  to  be  confined 
to  one  nation,  but  proraiscuouly  to  be  imparted  tb  the 
children  that  were  scattered  abroad  throughout  the  world  in 
every  kindred,  tongue,  and  nation,  under  heaven,  the  word 
*  world,'  being  used  to  signify  men  living  in  the  world,  some- 
times more,  sometimes  fewer,  seldom  or  never,  'all' (unless  a 
distribution  of  them  into  several  sorts  comprehensive  of  the 
universality  of  mankind  be  subjoined),  that  word  is  used  to 
express  them,  who  in  the  intention  of  God  and  Christ  are  to 
be  made  partakers  of  the  benefits  of  his  mediation.  Men  of  all 
sorts  throughout  the  world,  being  now  admitted  thereunto  : 
as  was  before  asserted. 

2.  The  benefit  of  redemption  being  thus  grounded  upon 
the  principle  of  peculiar,  not  universal  love,  whom  doth  God 
reveal  his  will  concerning  it  unto  ?  and  whom  doth  he  call 
to  the  participation  thereof?  If  it  be  equally  provided  for  all, 
out  of  the  same  love,  it  is  all  the  reason  in  the  world  that  all 
should  equally  be  called  to  a  participation  thereof,  or  at 
least  so  be  called,  as  to  have  it  made  known  unto  them.  For 
a  physician  to  pretend  that  he  hath  provided  a  sovereign  re- 
medy for  all  the  sick  persons  in  a  city,  out  of  an  equal  love 
that  he  bears  to  them  all,  and  when  he  hath  done,  takes  care 
that  some  few  know  of  it,  whereby  they  may  come  and  be 
healed,  but  leaves  the  rest  in  utter  ignorance  of  any  such 
provision  that  he  hath  made,  will  he  be  thought  to  deal  sin- 
cerely in  the  profession  that  he  makes  of  doing  of  this,  out 
of  an  equal  love  to  them  all  ?  Now  not  only  for  the  space  of 
almost  four  thousand  years  did  God  suffer  incomparably  the 
greatest  part  of  the  whole  world,  to  '  walk  in  their  own  ways, 
not  calling  them  to  repent,'  Acts  xiv.  16.  winking  at  that  long 
time  of  their  ignorance,  wherein  they  worshipped  stocks, 
stones,  and  devils ;  all  that  while  making  known  his  word 
unto  Jacob,  his  statutes  and  judgments  unto  Israel,  not  deal- 
ing so  with  any  nation,  whereby  they  knew  not  his  judg- 
ments ;  Psal.  cxlvii.  19,  20.  so  in  the  pursuit  of  his  eternal 
love,  calling  a  few  only,  in  comparison,  leaving  the  bulk  of 
mankind  in  sin,  without  hope  or  God  in  the  world  ;  Eph.  ii. 
12.  but  even  also  since  the  giving  out  of  a  commission  and 


OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION.       203 

express  command,  not  to  confine  the  preaching  of  the  word, 
and  calling  of  men,  to  Judea,  but  to  go  into  all  the  world 
and  to  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature ;  Mark  xvi.  15. 
whereupon  it  is  shortly  after  said,  to  be  preached  to  every 
creature  under  heaven  ;  Col.  i.  22.  the  apostle  thereby 
'  warning  every  man  and  teaching  every  man,  that  they 
might  present  every  man  to  Jesus  Christ ;'  Col.  i.  28.  namely, 
of  all  those  to  whom  he  came  and  preached,  not  the  Jews 
only,  but  of  all  sorts  of  men  under  heaven,  and  that  on  this 
ground,  that  God  would  have '  all  men  to  be  saved  and  come 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,'  1  Tim.  ii.  3,  4.  be  they  of  what 
sort  they  will,  kings,  rulers,  and  all  under  authority ;  yet 
even  to  this  very  day,  njany  whole  nations,  great  and  nume- 
rous sit  in  darkness  and  in  the  shadow  of  death,  having 
neither  in  their  own  days,  nor  in  the  days  of  their  forefathers, 
ever  been  made  partakers  of  the  glorious  gospel  of  Jesus 
Christ,  whereby  alone  life  and  immortality  are  brought  to 
light,  and  men  are  made  partakers  of  the  love  of  God  in  them. 
So  that  yet  we  have  not  the  least  evidence  of  the  universal 
love  pleaded  for.     Yea, 

3.  Whereas,  to  the  effectual  bringing  of  men  '  dead  in 
trespasses  and  sins'  to  a  participation  of  any  saving  spiritual 
effect  of  the  love  of  God  in  Christ,  besides  the  promulgation 
of  the  gospel  and  the  law  thereof,  which  consisteth  in  the  in- 
fallible connexion  of  faith  and  salvation  according  to  the 
tenor  of  it;  Matt.  xvi.  16.  'He  that  believeth  shall  be 
saved  ;'  which  is  accompanied  with  God's  command  to  be- 
lieve, wherein  he  declares  his  will  for  their  salvation,  upon 
the  terms  proposed,  approving  the  obedience  of  faith, 
and  giving  assurance  of  salvation  thereupon ;  1  Tim.  ii. 
1 — 4.  there  is  moreover  required  the  operation  of  God  by 
his  Spirit  with  power ;  to  evince  that  all  this  dispensation  is 
managed  by  peculiar  distinguishing  love,  this  is  not  granted 
to  all,  to  whom  the  commanding  and  approving  word  doth 
come,  but  only  to  them  who  are  the  called  according  to  his 
purpose;  Rom.  viii.  28.  that  is,  to  them  who  are  predesti- 
nated; ver.  30.  for  them  he  calls,  so  as  to  justify  and  glorify 
them  thereupon. 

4.  Not  then  to  insist  on  any  other  particular  effects  of 
the  love  of  God,  as  sanctification,  justification,  glorifica- 
tion ;  this  in  general  may  be  affirmed,  that  there  is  not  any 

p  2 


204       OF    UNIVERSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION. 

one  good  thing  ?vhatsoever,  that  is  proper  and  peculiar  to 
the  covenant  of  grace,  but  it  proceeds  from  a  distinguishing 
love,  and  an  intention  of  God  towards  some  only  therein. 

5.  It  is  true  that  God  inviteth  many  to  repentance,  and 
earnestly  inviteth  them  by  the  means  of  the  word,  which  he 
affords  them,  to  turn  from  their  evil  ways,  of  whom  all  the 
individuals  are  not  converted,  as  he  dealt  with  the  house  of 
Israel  (not  all  the  world,  but),  those  who  had  his  word  and 
ordinances,  Ezek.  xviii.  31,  32.  affirming  that  it  is  not  for  his 
pleasure,  but  for  their  sins,  that  they  die  ;  but  that  this  ma- 
nifests a  universal  love  in  God  in  the  way  spoken  of,  or 
any  thing  more  than  the  connexion  of  repentance  and  accep- 
tation with  God,  with  his  legal  approbation  of  turning  from 
sin,  there  is  no  matter  of  proof  to  evince. 

6.  Also,  he  is  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but 
that  all  should  come  to  repentance,  2  Pet.  iii.  9.  even  all 
those  towards  whom  he  exercises  patience  and  long-suffering 
for  that  end  (which,  as  the  apostle  there  informs,  is  to  us- 
ward)  that  is,  to  believers,  of  whom  he  h  speaking.  To  them 
also  it  is  said,  that  he  doth  not  '  afHict  willingly  nor  grieve 
the  children  of  men,'  Lam.  iii.  33.  even  his  church,  of  which 
the  prophet  is  speaking :  although  this  also  may  be  extended 
to  all;  God  never  afflicting  or  grieving  men,  but  it  is  for 
some  other  reason  and  cause,  than  merely  his  own  will;  their 
destruction  being  of  themselves.  David  indeed  tells  us, 
that  the '  Lord  is  gracious,  full  of  compassion ;  slow  to  anger, 
and  of  great  mercy :  that  the  Lord  is  good  to  all,  and  his 
tender  mercies  are  over  all  his  works;'  Psal.  cxlv.  8,  9.  But 
he  tells  us  withal,  whom  he  intends  by  the  '  all'  in  this  place, 
even  the  generation  which  '  praise  his  works  and  declare  his 
mighty  acts;'  ver.  4.  those  who  *  abundantly  utter  the  memory 
of  his  great  goodness,  and  sing  of  his  righteousness ;'  ver.  7. 
or  his  saints,  as  he  expressly  calls  them;  ver.  10.  The  word 
he  there  mentions,  is  the  word  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  over 
all,  wherein  the  tender  mercies  of  God  are  spread  abroad,  in 
reference  to  them  that  do  enjoy  them.  Not  but  that  God  is 
good  to  all,  even  to  his  whole  creation,  in  the  many  unspeak- 
able blessings  of  his  providence,  wherein  he  abounds  to- 
wards them  in  all  goodness,  but  that  is  not  here  intended. 
So  that  Mr.  B.  hath  fruitlessly  from  these  texts  of  Scripture, 
endeavoured  to  prove  a  universality  of  love  in  God,  incon- 


OF    UNIVEUSAL    GRACE    AND    ELECTION.       205 

si  stent  with  his  peculiar  love,  purpose,  and  intention  of  doing 
good,  in  the  sense  declared  to  some  only. 

And  thus  have  1  briefly  gone  through  this  chapter,  and 
by  the  way  taken  into  consideration  all  the  texts  of  Scrip- 
ture, which  he  there  wrests  to  confirm  his  figment,  on  the 
goodness  of  the  nature  of  God,  of  the  goodness  and  love  to 
all,  which  he  shews  in  great  variety,  and  several  degrees,  in 
the  dispensation  of  his  providence  throughout  the  world,  of 
this  universal  love,  and  what  it  is  in  the  sense  of  Mr.  B.  and 
his  companions,  of  its  inconsistency  with  the  immutability, 
prescience,  omnipotence,  fidelity,  love,  mercy,  and  faithful- 
ness of  God;  this  being  not  a  controversy  peculiar  to  them, 
with  whom  in  this  treatise  I  have  to  do,  I  shall  not  farther 
insist. 

As  I  have  in  the  preface  to  this  discourse  given  an  ac- 
count of  the  rise  and  present  state  of  Socinianism,  so  I 
thought  in  this  place  to  have  given  the  reader  an  account  of 
the  present  state  of  the  controversy  about  grace,  and  free- 
will, and  the  death  of  Christ,  with  especial  reference  to  the 
late  management  thereof  amongst  the  Romanists,  between 
the  Molinists  and  Jesuits  on  the  one  side,  with  the  Janse- 
nians,  or  Bayans  on  the  other ;  with  the  late  ecclesiastical 
and  political  transactions  in  Italy,  France,  and  Flanders,  in 
reference  thereunto,  with  an  account  of  the  books  lately 
written  on  the  one  side  and  the  other,  and  my  thoughts  of 
them ;  but  finding  this  treatise  grown  utterly  beyond  my  in- 
tention, I  shall  defer  the  execution  of  that  design  to  some 
other  opportunity,  if  God  think  good  to  continue  my  por- 
tion any  longer  in  the  land  of  the  living. 

The  14th  chapter  of  the  catechist,  is  about  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ.  What  are  the  proper  fruits  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ,  and  the  benefits  we  receive  thereby,  and  upon 
what  account  our  justification  is  ascribed  thereto,  whether 
as  the  great  and  eminent  confirmation  of  the  doctrine  he 
tauo-ht,  or  as  the  issue,  pledge,  and  evidence  of  the  accom- 
plishment of  the  work  of  our  salvation  by  death,  it  being  im- 
possible for  him  to  be  detained  thereby,  is  not  here  dis- 
cussed ;  that  which  the  great  design  of  this  chapter  appears 
to  disprove,  is,  Christ's  raising  himself  by  his  own  power  ; 
concerning  which  this  is  the  question  : 

'  Did  Christ  rise  by  his  own  power;  yea,  did  he  raise  him-> 


206  OF    JUSTIFICATION    AND    FAITH. 

self  at  all  ?  or  was  he  raised  by  the  power  of  another  ?  and 
did  another  raise  him?  What  is  the  perpetual  tenor  of  the 
Scripture  to  this  purpose  ?' 

In  answer  hereunto,  many  texts  of  Scripture  are  re- 
hearsed, where  it  is  said,  that  '  God  raised  him  from  the 
dead,  and  that  he  was  raised  by  the  power  of  God.' 

But  we  have  manifested,  that  Mr.  B.  is  to  come  to  an- 
other reckoning,  before  he  can  make  any  work  of  this  argu- 
ment; God  raised  him,  therefore  he  did  not  raise  himself: 
when  he  hath  proved  that  he  is  not  God,  let  him  freely  make 
such  an  inference  and  conclusion  as  this  :  in  the  meantime, 
we  say,  because  *God  raised  him  from  the  dead,'  he  raised 
himself;  for  he  is  'God  over  all  blessed  for  ever.' 

2.  It  is  true,  that  Christ  is  said  to  be  raised  by  God, 
taken  personally  for  the  Father,  whose  joint  power,  with  his 
own,  as  that  also  of  the  Spirit,  was  put  forth  in  this  work  of 
raising  Christ  from  the  dead.  And  for  his  own  raising  him- 
self, if  Mr.  B.  will  believe  him,  this  business  will  be  put  to  a 
short  issue :  he  tells  us,  that '  he  laid  down  his  life,  that  he 
might  take  it  up  again.  No  man,'  saith  he,  '  taketh  it  from  me, 
I  have  power  to  lay  it  down  of  myself,  and  I  have  power  to 
take  it  again  ;'  John  x.  17,  18.  And  speaking  of  the  temple 
of  his  body,  he  bade  the  Jews  destroy  it,  and,  'that  he  would 
raise  it  again  within  three  days  :'  which  we  believe  he  did, 
and  if  Mr.  B.  be  otherwise  minded,  we  cannot  help  it. 


CHAP.  XXXII. 

Of  justification  and  faith. 


This  chapter,  for  the  title  and  subject  of  it,  would  require  a 
large  and  serious  consideration ;  but  by  Mr.  Biddle's  loose 
procedure  in  this  business  (whom  only  I  shall  now  attend), 
we  are  absolved  from  any  strict  inquiry  into  the  whole  doc- 
trine that  is  concerned  herein.  Some  brief  animadversions 
upon  his  questions,  and  suiting  of  answers  to  them,  will  be 
all  that  I  shall  go  forth  unto.     His  first  is, 

'Q.  How  many  sorts  of  justification  or  righteousness  are 
there?' 

This  question  supposeth  righteousness  and  justification 


OF    JUSTIFICATION    AND    FAITH.  207 

to  be  the  same  :  which  is  a  gross  notion  for  a  Master  of  Arts. 
Righteousness  is  that  which  God  requires  of  us,  justification 
is  his  act  concerning  man,  considered  as  vested  or  indued 
with  that  righteousness  which  he  requires  :  righteousness  is 
the  qualification  of  the  person  to  be  justified;  justification 
the  act  of  him  that  justifies.  A  man's  legal  honesty  in  his 
trial,  is  not  the  sentence  of  the  judge  pronouncing  him  so  to 
be,  to  all  ends  and  purposes  of  that  honesty.  But  to  his 
question  Mr.  B.  answers  from  Rom.  x.  5.  '  the  righteousness 
which  is  of  the  law,'  and  Phil.  iii.  9.  '  the  righteousness 
which  is  of  God  by  faith,' 

It  is  true,  there  is  this  twofold  righteousness  that  men 
maybe  partakers  of;  a  righteousness  consisting  in  exact, 
perfect,  and  complete  obedience  yielded  to  the  law,  which 
God  required  of  man  under  the  covenant  of  works,  and  the 
righteousness  which  is  of  God  by  faith,  of  which  afterward. 
Answerable  hereunto  there  is,  hath  been,  or  may  be,  a  two- 
fold justification:  the  one  consisting  in  God's  declaration 
of  him,  who  performs  all  that  he  requires  in  the  law,  to  be 
just  and  righteous,  and  his  acceptation  of  him  according  to 
the  promise  of  life,  which  he  annexed  to  the  obedience, 
which  of  man  he  did  require ;   and  the  other  answers  that 
righteousness  which  shall  afterward  be   described.     Now 
though  these  two  righteousnesses  agree  in  their  general  end, 
which  is  acceptation  with  God,  and  a  reward  from  him,  ac- 
cording to  his  promise;  yet  in  their  own  natures,  causes, and 
manner  of  attaining,  they  are  altogether  inconsistent  and 
destructive  of  each  other :  so  that  it  is  utterly  impossible 
they  should  ever  meet  in  and  upon  the  same  person. 

For  the  description  of  the  first,  Mr.  B.  gives  it  in  answer 
to  this  question. 

*  How  is  the  rihgteousness  which  is  of  the  law  described? 
'  A.  Moses  describeth  the  righteousness  which  is  of  the 
law,  that  the  man  that  doeth  those  things  shall  live  by  them  ; 
Rom.  X.  5.' 

This  description  is  full  and  complete.  *  The  doing  of  the 
things  of  the  law,'  or  all  the  things  the  law  requireth,  to  this 
end  that  a  man  may  live  by  them,  or  a  keeping  of  the  com- 
mandments that  we  may  enter  into  life,  makes  up  this 
righteousness  of  the  law.  And  whatsoever  any  man  doth, 
or  may  do,  that  is  required  by  the  law  of  God  (as  believing, 


208  OF    JUSTIFICATION    AND    FAITH. 

trusting:  in  him,  and  the  like),  to  this  end,  that  he  may  live 
thereby,  that  it  may  be  his  righteousness  towards  God,  that 
thereupon  he  may  be  justified,  it  belongs  to  this  righteous- 
ness of  the  law  here  described  by  Moses.  I  say,  whatever  is 
performed  by  man  in  obedience  to  any  law  of  God  to  this 
end,  that  a  man  may  live  thereby,  and  that  it  may  be  the 
matter  of  his  righteousness,  it  belongs  to  the  righteousness 
here  described  :  and  of  this  we  may  have  some  use,  in  the 
consideration  of  Mr.  B.'s  ensuing  queries.     He  adds, 

*  Q.  What  speaketh  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith  ? 
'A.  Rom.  X.  8,  9.    The  word  is  nigh  thee,  even  in  thy 

mouth,'and  in  thy  heart:  that  is,  the  word  which  we  preach; 
that  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and  shalt  believe  in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him 
from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.' 

The  object  of  justifying  faith  ;  namely,  Jesus  Christ  as 
dying  and  rising  again  from  the  dead  to  the  obtaining  of 
eternal  redemption,  and  bringing  in  everlasting  righteous- 
ness, is  in  these  words  described.  And  this  is  that  which 
the  righteousness  of  faith  is  said  to  speak;  because  Christ 
dying  and  rising  is  our  righteousness.  He  is  made  so  to 
us  of  God,  and  being  under  the  consideration  of  his  death 
and  resurrection  received  of  us  by  faith,  we  are  justified. 

His  next  question  is, 

*  Q.  In  the  justification  of  a  believer  is  the  righteousness 
of  Christ  imputed  to  him,  or  is  his  own  faith  counted  for 
righteousness  ? 

'A.  Rom.  iv.  5.  His  faith  is  counted  for  righteousness.' 
What  Mr.  B.  intends  by  faith,  and  what  by  accounting 
of  it  for  righteousness,  we  know  full  well.  The  justification 
he  intends  by  these  expressions  is  the  plain  old  Pharisaical 
justification,  and  no  other :  as  shall  elsewhere  be  abundantly 
manifested.  For  the  present,  I  shall  only  say,  that  Mr. 
Biddle  doth  most  ignorantly  oppose  the  imputing  of  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  to  us,  and  the  accounting  of  our 
faith  for  righteousness,  as  inconsistent.  It  is  the  account- 
ing of  our  faith  for  righteousness,  and  the  righteousness  of 
works,  that  is  opposed  by  the  apostle.  The  righteousness 
of  faith  and  the  righteousness  of  Christ  are  every  way  one 
and  the  same  ;  the  one  denoting  that  whereby  we  receive  it, 
and  are  made  partakers  of  it,  the  other  that  which  is  re- 


OF    JUSTIFICATION     AND    FAITH.  209 

ceived,  and  whereby  we  are  justified.  And  indeed  there  is 
a  perfect  inconsistency  between  the  apostle's  intention  in 
this  expression,  *to  him  that  worketh  not,  but  believeth  on 
him  that  justifies  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  accounted  to  him 
for  righteousness,'  taken  with  his  explication  of  it,  that  we 
are  made  'partakers  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ  by  faith,' 
and  therein  he  is  made  'righteousness  to  them  that  believe/ 
with  Mr.  B.'s  interpretation  of  it,  which  is  (as  shall  be  far- 
ther manifested),  '  to  him  that  worketh  and  believes  on  him 
that  justifies  the  righteous,  his  obedience  is  his  righteous- 
ness.'    But  of  this  elsewhere. 

The  next  question  and  answer  is  about  Abraham  and  his 
justification,  which  being  but  an  instance  exemplifying  what 
was  spoken  before,  I  shall  not  need  to  insist  thereon.  Of 
his  believing  on  God  only,  our  believing  on  Christ,  which  is 
also  mentioned,  I  have  spoken  already,  and  shall  not  trouble 
the  reader  with  repetition  thereof. 

But  he  farther  argues  : 

'Q.  Doth  not  God  justify  men  because  of  the  full  price 
Christ  paid  to  him  in  their  stead,  so  that  he  abated  nothing 
of  his  right,  in  that  one  drop  of  Christ's  blood  was  suffi- 
cient to  satisfy  for  a  thousand  worlds  ?  If  not,  how  are  they 
saved  ? 

'A.  Being  justified  freely;  Rom.  iii.  24.  Eph.  i.  17.' 

That  Christ  did  pay  a  full  price  or  ransom  for  us,  that  he 
did  stand  in  our  stead,  that  he  was  not  abated  any  jot  of  the 
penalty  of  the  law  that  was  due  to  sinners,  that  on  this 
account  we  are  fully  acquitted,  and  that  the  forgiveness  of 
our  sins  is  by  the  redemption  that  is  in  his  blood,  hath 
been  already  fully  and  at  large  evinced.  Let  Mr.  B.  if  he 
please,  attempt  to  evert  what  hath  been  spoken  to  that 
purpose. 

The  expression  about '  one  drop  of  Christ's  blood,'  is  a 
fancy  or  imagination  of  idle  monks,  men  ignorant  of  the 
righteousness  of  God,  and  the  whole  nature  of  the  media- 
tion which  our  blessed  Saviour  undertook ;  wherein  thejr 
have  not  the  least  communion.  The  close  of  the  chap- 
ter is, 

'  Q.  Did  not  Christ  merit  eternal  life  and  purchase  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  for  us  ? 

'  A.  The  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life ;  Rom,  vi.  23.     It  is 


210  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you  the  kingdom  ; 
Luke  xii.  32.' 

Eternal  life  is  the  gift  of  God,  in  opposition  to  any  merit 
of  ours,  and  in  respect  of  his  designation  of  him,  who  is 
eternal  life,  to  be  our  Mediator,  and  purchaser  of  it ;  yet  that 
Christ  did  not  therefore  obtain  by  his  blood,  for  us  'eternal 
redemption ;'  Heb.  ix.  12.  that  he  did  not  purchase  us  to 
himself;  Tit.  ii.  14.  or  that  the  merit  of  Christ  for  us,  and 
the  free  grace  of  God  unto  us,  are  inconsistent,  our  catechist 
attempts  not  to  prove.  Of  the  reconciliation  of  God's  pur- 
pose and  good  pleasure,  mentioned,  Luke  xii.  32.  with  the 
satisfaction  and  merit  of  the  Mediator,  I  have  spoken  also  at 
large  already. 

I  have  thus  briefly  passed  through  this  chapter,  although 
it  treateth  of  one  of  the  most  important  heads  of  our  religion, 
because  (the  Lord  assisting)  I  intend  the  full  handling  of 
the  doctrine  opposed  in  it,  in  a  just  treatise  to  that  purpose. 


CHAP.  XXXIII. 

Of  keeping  the  commandments  of  God:  and  of  perfection  of  obedience^ 
how  attainable  in  this  life. 

The  title  of  the  16th  chapter  in  our  catechist,  is,  of  keeping 
the  commandments,  and  having  an  eye  to  the  reward,  of  per- 
fection in  virtue  and  godliness  to  be  attained ;  and  of  de- 
parting from  righteousness  and  faith.  What  the  man  hath 
to  offer  on  these  several  heads,  shall  be  considered  in  order. 
His  first  question  is, 

*  Q.  Are  the  commandments  possible  to  be  kept? 

*  A.  His  commandments  are  not  grievous  ;  John  v.  3. 
My  yoke  is  easy,  and  my  burden  light ;  Matt.  xi.  30.' 

1.  I  presume  it  is  evident  to  every  one,  at  the  first  view, 
that  there  is  very  little  relation  between  the  question  and 
the  answer  thereunto  sugg;psted.  The  inquiry  is  of  our 
strength  and  power :  the  answer  speaks  to  the  nature  of  the 
commands  of  God.  It  never  xame  sure  into  the  mind  of 
any  living,  that  the  meaning  of  this  question,  'Are  the  com- 
mandments possible  to  be  kept  ?'  is, '  Is  there  an  absolute  im- 
possibility from  the  nature  of  the  commands  of  God  them- 


IN    THIS    LIFE.  211 

selves  that  they  cannot  be  kept  by  any  V  Nor  did  ever  any 
man  say  so,  or  can  without  the  greatest  blasphemy  against 
God.  But  the  question  is,  what  power  there  is  in  man  to 
keep  those  commandments  of  God  ;  which  certainly  the 
texts  insisted  on  by  Mr.  B.  do  not  in  the  least  give  an  an- 
swer unto. 

2.  He  tells  us  not,  in  what  state  or  condition  he  supposes 
that  person  to  be,  concerning  whom  the  inquiry  is  made, 
whether  he  can  possibly  keep  the  commandments  of  God  or 
no  :  whether  he  speaks  of  all  men  in  general,  or  any  man 
indefinitely,  or  restrainedly  of  believers.     Nor, 

3.  Doth  he  inform  us,  what  he  intends  by  keeping  the 
commands  of  God.  Whether  an  exact,  perfect,  and  every 
way  complete  keeping  of  them,  up  to  the  highest  degree  of 
all  things,  in  all  things,  circumstances,  and  concernments  of 
them  :  or  whether  the  keeping  of  them  in  a  universal  sin- 
cerity, accepted  before  God,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the 
covenant  of  grace,  be  intended.     Nor, 

4.  What  commandments  they  are,  which  he  chiefly  re- 
spects, and  under  what  consideration  :  whether  all  the  com- 
mands of  the  law  of  God  as  such ;  or  whether  the  gospel 
commands  of  faith  and  love,  which  the  places  from  whence 
he  answers  do  respect.     Nor, 

5.  What  he  means  by  the  impossibility  of  keeping  God's 
commands,  which  he  intends  to  deny ;  that  which  is  abso- 
lutely so  from  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  or  that  which 
is  so  only  in  some  respect,  with  reference  to  some  certain 
state  and  condition  of  man. 

When  we  know  in  what  sense  the  question  is  proposed, 
we  shall  be  enabled  to  return  an  answer  thereunto,  which  he 
that  hath  proposed  it  here,  knew  not  how  to  do  :  in  the 
meantime,  to  the  thing  itself  intended,  according  to  tlie 
light  of  the  premised  distinctions,  we  say  that  all  the  com- 
mandments of  God,  the  whole  law  is  excellent,  precious, 
not  grievous  in  itself,  or  its  own  nature,  but  admirably  ex- 
pressing the  goodness,  and  kindness,  and  holiness  of  him 
that  gave  it,  in  relation  to  them  to  whom  it  was  given,  and 
can  by  no  means  be  said,  as  from  itself  and  upon  its  own 
account,  to  be  impossible  to  be  kept.     Yet, 

2.  No  unregenerate  man  can  possibly  keep,  that  is,  hath 
in  himself  a  power  to  keep  any  one  of  all  the  command- 


212  OF     PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

ments  of  God,  as  to  the  matter  required,  and  the  manner 
wherein  it  is  required.  This  impossibility  is  not  in  the  least 
relating  to  the  nature  of  the  law,  but  to  the  impotency,  and 
corruption  of  the  person  lying  under  it. 

3.  No  man  though  regenerate,  can  fulfil  the  law  of  God 
perfectly,  or  keep  all  the  commandments  of  God,  according 
to  the  original  tenor  of  the  law,  in  all  the  parts  and  degrees 
of  it ;  nor  ever  any  man  did  so,  since  sin  entered  into  the 
world  ;  for  it  is  impossible  that  any  regenerate  man  should 
keep  the  commandments  of  God,  as  they  are  the  tenor  of 
the  covenant  of  works.  If  this  were  otherwise,  the  law 
would  not  have  been  made  weak  by  sin,  that  it  should  not 
justify. 

4.  That  it  is  impossible,  that  any  man  though  regenerate, 
should  by  his  own  strength  fulfil  any  one  of  the  commands 
of  God,  seeing  '  without  Christ  we  can  do  nothing,'  and  it 
is  '  God  who  works  in  us  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  plea- 
sure.' 

5.  That  to  keep  the  commandments  of  God,  not  as  the 
tenor  of  the  covenantor  works,  nor  in  an  absolute  jjerfection 
of  obedience  and  correspondency  to  the  law  ;  but  sincerely 
and  uprightly,  unto  acceptation,  according  to  the  tenor  of 
the  covenant  of  grace,  and  the  obedience  it  requires,  through 
the  assistance  of  the  Spirit  and  grace  of  God,  is  not  only  a 
thing  possible,  but  easy,  pleasant,  and  delightful. 

Thus  we  say, 

1.  That  a  person  regenerate  by  the  assistance  of  the  Spi- 
rit and  grace  of  God,  may  keep  the  commandments  of  God, 
in  yielding  to  him,  in  answer  to  them,  that  sincere  obedience, 
which  in  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  covenant 
of  grace,  is  required  :  yea,  it  is  to  him  an  easy  and  pleasant 
thing  so  to  do. 

2.  That  an  unregenerate  person  should  keep  any  one  of 
God's  commandments  as  he  ought,  is  impossible,  not  from 
the  nature  of  God's  commands,  but  from  his  own  state  and 
condition. 

3.  That  a  person,  though  regenerate,  yet  being  so  but  in 
part,  and  carrying  about  him  a  body  of  death,  should  keep  • 
the  commands  of  God,  in  a  perfection  of  obedience,  accord- 
ing to  the  law  of  the  covenant  of  works,  is  impossible  from 
the  condition  of  a  regenerate  man,  and  not  from  the  nature 


IN     THIS    LIFE.  213 

of  God's  commands.     What  is  it  now  that  Mr.  B.  opposes? 
Or  what  is  that  he  asserts  ? 

I  suppose  he  declares  his  mind  in  his  lesser  catechism, 
chap.  vii.  Q.  1.  where  he  proposes  his  question  in  the  words 
ofthe  ruler  amongst  the  Jews  ;  '  What  good  shall  a  man  do 
that  he  may  have  eternal  life  V  An  answer  of  it  follows  in 
that  of  our  Saviour,  Matt.  xix.  17 — 19.  *  If  thou  wilt  enter 
into  life,  keep  the  commandments. 

The  intendment  of  this  inquiry  must  be  the  same  with 
his  that  made  it,  as  his  argument  in  the  whole  is  ;  or  the 
answer  of  our  Saviour,  is  no  way  suited  thereunto.  Now  it 
is  most  evident,  that  the  inquiry  was  made  according  to  the 
principles  of  the  Pharisees,  who  expected  justification  by 
the  works  of  the  law,  according  to  the  tenor  of  a  covenant 
of  works,  to  which  presumption  of  theirs,  our  Saviour  suits 
his  answer:  and  seeing  they  sought  to  be  justified,  and 
saved,  as  it  were,  by  the  works  of  the  law,  to  the  law  he  sends 
them.  This  then  being  Mr.  B.'s  sense,  wherein  he  affirms 
that  it  is  possible  to  keep  the  commandments,  so  as  for 
doing  good,  and  keeping  them,  to  enter  into  life,  I  shall  only 
remit  him,  as  our  Saviour  did  the  Pharisees  to  the  law  :  but 
yet  I  shall  withal  pray,  that  our  merciful  Lord,  would  not 
leave  him  to  the  foolish  choice  of  his  own  darkened  heart, 
but  in  his  due  time,  by  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  which  yet 
he  seems  to  despise,  send  him  forth  of  the  'prison  wherein  is 
no  water.' 

*Q.  2.  But  though  it  be  possible  to  keep  the  command- 
ments, yet  is  it  not  enough,  if  we  desire  and  endeavour  to 
keep  them  ;  although  we  actually  keep  them  not  ?  And  doth 
not  God  accept  the  will  for  the  deed? 

'A.  1  Cor.  vii.  19.  Matt.  vii.  21.  24.  26.  James  i.  25. 
Rom,  ii.  10.  John  xiii.  17.  Luke  xi.  24.  2  Cor.  v.  10.  Matt, 
xvi.  27.  Hev.  xxii.21.  Matt.  xix.  18,  19.  In  all  which  places, 
there  is  mention  of  doing  the  will  of  God,  of  keeping  the 
commandments  of  God.' 

The  aim  of  this  question,  is  to  take  advantage  at  what 
hath  been  delivered  by  some,  not  as  an  ordinary  rule  for  all 
men  to  walk  by,  but  as  an  extraordinary  relief  for  some  in 
distress.  When  poor  souls,  bowed  down  under  the  sense  of 
their  own  weakness  and  insufficiency  for  obedience,  and 
the  exceeding  unsuitableness  of  their  best  performances  to 


214  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

the  spiritual  and  exact  perfection  of  the  law  of  God  (things 
which  the  proud  Pharisees  of  the  world  are  unacquainted 
withal),  to  support  them  under  their  distress,  they  have  been 
by  some  directed  to  the  consideration  of  the  sincerity  that 
was  in  their  obedience,  which  they  did  yield,  and  guided  to 
examine  that,  by  their  desires  and  endeavours.  Now  as  this 
direction  is  not  without  a  good  foundation  in  the  Scripture  ; 
Nehemiah,  describing  the  saints  of  God  by  this  character, 
that  they  desire  to  fear  the  name  of  God  ;  Neh.  i.  11.  and 
David  every  where  professing  this,  as  an  eminent  property 
of  a  child  of  God,  so  they  who  gave  it,  were  very  far  from 
understanding  such  desires,  as  may  be  pretended  as  a  co- 
lour for  sloth  and  negligence,  to  give  countenance  to  the 
souls  and  consciences  of  men  in  a  willing  neglect  of  the  per- 
formance of  such  duties,  as  they  are  to  press  after;  but  such 
they  intend,  as  had  adjoined  to  them,  and  accompanying  of 
them,  earnest,  continual,  sincere,  endeavours  (as  Mr.  B.  ac- 
knowledge th)'to  walk  before  God  in  all  well-pleasing,  though 
they  could  not  attain  to  that  perfection  of  obedience  that  is 
required.  And  in  this  case,  though  we  make  not  application 
of  the  particular  rule  of  accepting  the  will  for  the  deed,  to 
the  general  case,  yet  we  fear  not  to  say,  that  this  is  all  the 
perfection  which  the  best  of  the  saints  of  God  in  this  life 
attain  to  :  and  which,  according  to  the  tenor  of  that  cove- 
nant wherein  we  now  walk  with  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  is  ac- 
cepted.    This  is  all  the  doing  or  keeping  of  the  command- 
ments that  is  intended  in  any  of  the  places  quoted  by  Mr.  B. 
unless    that   last :  wherein  our  Saviour  sends   that  proud 
Pharisee,  according  to  his  own  principles  to  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  law  which  he  followed  after,  but  could  not  at- 
tain.    But  of  this  more  afterward.     He  farther  argues  : 

'  Q.  Though  it  be  not  only  possible  but  also  necessary 
to  keep  the  commandments,  yet  is  it  lawful  so  to  do  that  we 
may  have  a  right  to  eternal  life,  and  the  heavenly  inherit- 
ance? May  we  seek  for  honour,  and  glory,  and  immortality, 
by  well-doing?  is  it  the  tenor  of  the  gospel  that  we  should 
live  uprightly  in  expectation  of  the  hope  hereafter?  and 
finally,  ought  we  to  suffer  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  not 
as  some  are  pleased  to  mince  that  matter  from  the  kingdom 
of  God  ?  Where  are  the  testimonies  of  Scripture  to  this 
purpose  ? 


IN    THIS    LIFE,  215 

'A.  Rev.xxii.  14.  Rom.  ii.  6— 8.  Tit.  ii.  11.  13.  2  Thess. 
i.  5.' 

Alls.  1.  In  what  sense  it  is  possible  to  keep  the  command- 
ments, in  what  not,  hath  been  declared.  2.  How  it  is  ne- 
cessary, or  in  what  sense,  or  for  what  end,  Mr.  B.  hath  not 
yet  spoken,  though  he  supposeth  he  hath  ;  but  we  will  take 
it  for  granted  that  it  is  necessary  for  us  so  to  do ;  in  that 
sense,  and  for  that  end  and  purpose,  for  which  it  is  of  us  re- 
quired. 3.  To  allow  then  the  gentleman  the  advantage  of 
his  captious  procedure  by  a  multiplication  of  entangled 
queries  ;  and  to  take  them  in  that  order  wherein  they  lie. 

To  the  first,  '  whether  we  may  keep  the  commandments 
that  we  may  have  right  to  eternal  life.'  I  say,  1.  Keeping  of 
the  commandments  in  the  sense  acknowledged  may  be 
looked  on  in  respect  of  eternal  life,  either  as  the  cause  pro- 
curing it,  or  as  the  means  conducing  to  it.  2.  A  right  to 
eternal  life  may  be  considered  in  respect  of  the  rise  and 
constitution  of  it,  or  of  the  present  evidence  and  last  en- 
joyment of  it.  There  is  a  twofold  right  to  the  kingdom  of 
heaven;  a  right  of  desert  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  co- 
venant of  works ;  and  a  right  of  promise  according  to  the 
tenor  of  the  covenant  of  grace.  I  say,  then,  that  it  is  not 
lawful,  that  is,  it  is  not  the  way,  rule,  and  tenor  of  the  gos- 
pel, that  we  should  do  or  keep  the  commandments,  so 
that  doing  or  keeping  should  be  the  cause  procuring  and 
obtaining  an  original  right,  as  to  the  rise  and  constitution 
of  it,  or  a  right  of  desert  to  eternal  life.  This  is  the  perfect 
tenor  of  the  covenant  of  works  and  righteousness  of  the 
law,  '  do  this  and  live  ;  if  a  man  do  the  work  of  the  law  he 
shall  live  thereby ;'  and, '  if  thou  wilt  enter  into  life,  keep  the 
commandments  :'  which  if  there  be  any  gospel  or  new  co- 
venant confirmed  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  is  antiquated  as 
to  its  efficacy,  and  was  ever  since  the  entrance  of  sin  into 
the  world  ;  as  being  ineffectual  for  the  bringing  of  any  soul 
unto  God  ;  Rom.  viii,  3.  Heb.  viii.  11,  12.  This,  if  it  were 
■  needful,  I  might  confirm  with  innumerable  texts  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  the  transcription  of  a  good  part  of  the  epistles  of 
Paul  in  particular.  3.  The  inheritance  which  is  purchased 
for  us  by  Christ,  and  is  the  gift  of  God,  plainly  excludes 
'  all  such  confidence  in  keeping  the  commandments,  as  is 
pleaded  for.     For  my  part,  I  willingly  ascribe  to  obedience 


216  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

any  thing  that  hath  a  consistency  (in  reference  to  eternal 
life)  with  the  full  purchase  of  Christ,  and  the  free  donation 
of  God;  and  therefore,  I  say,  4.  As  a  means  appointed  of 
God,  as  the  way  wherein  we  ought  to  walk,  for  the  coming 
to,  and  obtaining  of,  the  inheritance  so  fully  purchased  and 
freely  given,  for  the  evidencing  of  the  right  given  us  thereto 
by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  giving  actual  admission  to  the 
enjoyment  of  the  purchase,  and  to  testify  our  free  accepta- 
tion with  God,  and  adoption  on  that  account,  so  we  ought 
to  do,  and  keep  the  commandments ;  that  is,  walk  in  holi- 
ness, without  which  none  shall  see  God.  This  is  all  that 
is  intended,  Rev.  xxii.  14.  Christ  speaks  not  there  to  unbe 
lievers,  shewing  what  they  must  do  to  be  justified  and  saved  ; 
but  to  redeemed,  justified,  and  sanctified  ones  ;  shewing 
them  their  way  of  admission  and  the  means  of  it  to  the  re- 
maining privileges  of  the  purchase  made  by  his  blood. 

His  next  question  is,  '  May  we  seek  for  honour  and 
glory  and  immortality  by  well-doing?'  which  words  are 
taken  from  Rom.  ii.  7,  8. 

I  answer.  The  words  there  are  used  in  a  law  sense,  and 
are  declarative  of  the  righteousness  of  God,  in  rewarding 
the  keepers  of  the  law  of  nature,  or  the  moral  law,  accord- 
ing to  the  law  of  the  covenant  of  works.  This  is  evident 
from  the  whole  design  of  the  apostle  in  that  place,  which 
is  to  convince  all  men,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  of  sin  against  the 
law  ;  and  the  impossibility  of  the  obtaining  the  glory  of 
God  thereby.  So  in  particular  from  ver.  10.  where  salva- 
tion is  annexed  to  works,  in  the  very  terms  wherein  the 
righteousness  of  the  law  is  expressed  by  Mr.  B,  in  the  chap- 
ter of  justification  ;  and  in  direct  opposition  whereunto,  the 
apostle  sets  up  the  righteousness  of  the  gospel;  chap.  i.  17. 
iii.  and  iv.  But  yet  translate  the  words  into  a  gospel  sense, 
consider  well-doing  as  the  way  appointed  for  us  to  walk  in, 
for  the  obtaining  of  the  end  mentioned,  and  consider  glory, 
honour,  and  immortality,  as  a  reward  of  our  obedience,  pur- 
chased by  Christ,  and  freely  promised  of  God  on  that  ac- 
count, and  I  say  we  may,  we  ought,  'by  patient  continuing  in 
well-doing,  to  seek  for  glory,  honour,  and  immortality;'  that 
is,  it  is  our  duty  to  abide  in  the  way,  and  use  of  the  means 
prescribed^  for  the  obtaining  of  the  inheritance  purchased 
and  promised:  but  yet  this,  with  the  limitations  before  in 


]N    THIS    LIFE.  217 

part  mentioned  :  as  l.That  of  ourselves  we  can  do  no  good  ; 
2  That  the  ability  we  have  to  do  good,  is  purchased  for  us 
by  Christ.  3.  This  is  not  so  full  in  this  life,  as  that  we  can 
perfectly,  to  all  degrees  of  perfection,  do  good,  or  yield 
obedience  to  the  law.  4.  That  which  by  grace  we  do  yield 
and  perform,  is  not  the  cause  procuring  or  meriting  of  that 
inheritance  :  which  6.  As  the  grace  whereby  we  obey,  is 
fully  purchased  for  us  by  Christ,  and  freely  bestowed  upon 
us  by  God. 

His  next  is,  '  Is  it  the  tenor  of  the  gospel  that  we  should 
live  uprightly  in  expectation  of  the  hope  hereafter  V  Doubt- 
less, neither  shall  I  need  to  give  any  answer  at  all  to  this 
part  of  the  inquiry  but  what  lies  in  the  words  of  the  Scrip- 
ture, produced  for  the  proof  of  our  catechist's  intention. 
'The  grace  of  God  that  bringeth  salvation  hath  appeared  to 
all  men,  teaching  us  that,  denying  ungodliness  and  worldly 
lusts,  we  should  live  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly  in  this 
present  world  ;  looking  for  the  blessed  hope  and  a  glorious 
appearance  of  the  great  God  and  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ;' 
Tit.  ii.  11 — 13.  Christ  the  great  God  our  Saviour,  having 
promised  an  inheritance  to  us  with  himself,  at  his  glorious 
appearance,  raiseth  up  our  hearts  with  a  hope  and  expec- 
tation thereof;  his  grace  or  the  doctrine  of  it,  teacheth  us 
to  perform  all  manner  of  holiness  and  righteousness  all 
our  days  ;  and  this  is  the  tenor  and  law  of  the  gospel,  that 
so  we  do;  but  what  this  is  to  Mr.  Biddle's  purpose  I 
know  not. 

His  last  attempt  is  upon  the  exposition  of  some  (I  know 
not  whom)  who  have  minced  the  doctrine  so  small,  it  seems, 
that  he  can  find  no  relish  in  it ;  saith  he,  '  finally  ought  we 
to  suffer  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  or  from  the  kingdom  of 
God  V  his  answer  is,  2  Thess.  i.  5.  '  That  you  may,be  counted 
worthy  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  for  which  you  also  suffer.' 
I  confess  '  suffering  from  the  kingdom  of  God,' is  something 
an  uncouth  expression ;  and  those  who  have  used  it  to  the 
offence  of  this  gentleman,  might  have  more  commodiously 
delivered  what  they  did  intend.  But  the  '  kingdom  of  God' 
being  sometimes  taken  for  that  rule  of  grace  which  Christ 
hath  in  the  hearts  of  believers,  and  thereupon  being  said  to 
be  within  us,  and  the  word, '  from,' denoting  the  principle  of 
obedience  in  suffering,  there  is  a  truth  in  the  expression, 

VOL.  IX.  Q 


218  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

and  that  very  consistent  with  suffering  for  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  here  is  opposed  unto  it.  To  suffer  from  the 
kingdom  of  God,  is  no  more,  than  to  be  enabled  to  suffer 
from  a  principle  of  grace  within  us,  by  which  Christ  bears 
rule  in  our  hearts  ;  and  in  this  sense  we  say  that  no  man 
can  do  or  suffer  any  thing  so,  as  it  shall  be  acceptable  unto 
God,  but  it  must  be  from  the  kingdom  of  God :  for  they 
that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God,  even  their  sacri- 
fices are  an  abomination  to  him.  This  is  so  far  from  hin- 
dering us,  as  to  suffering  for  the  kingdom  of  God,  that  is, 
to  endure  persecution  for  the  profession  of  the  gospel  (for 
in  the  place  of  the  apostle  cited  denotes  the  procuring  oc- 
casion, not  final  cause)  that  without  it  so  we  cannot  do  j 
and  so  the  minced  matter  hath  I  hope  a  savoury  relish  reco- 
vered unto  it  again. 

His  next  questions  are  :  1.  '  Have  you  any  examples  of 
keeping  the  commandments  under  the  law  ?  what  saith 
David  of  himself?  Psal.  xviii.  20—24.  And, 

2.  *  Have  you  any  example  under  the  gospel  ?  1  John 
iii.  10.  Because  we  keep  his  commandments.' 

All  this  trouble  is  Mr.  B.  advantaged  to  make  from  the 
ambiguity  of  this  expression  of  keeping  the  commandments. 
We  know  full  well  what  David  saith  of  his  obedience,  and 
what  he  said  of  his  sins  ;  so  that  we  know  his  keeping  of 
the  commandments  was  in  respect  of  sincerity,  as  to  all  the 
commandments  of  God,  and  all  the  parts  of  them  :  but  not 
as  to  his  perfection  in  keeping  all  or  any  of  them.  And  he 
who  says  *  we  keep  his  commandments,'  says  also,  that  '  if 
we  say  we  have  no  sin,  we  lie  and  deceive  ourselves,  and 
the  truth  is  not  in  us.' 

He  adds,  *  Have  you  not  examples  of  the  choicest  saints 
who  obeyed  God  in  hope  of  the  reward  both  before,  under, 
and  after  the  law  V  Heb.  xi.  8—10.  24—26.  xii.  12.  Tit.  i.  1,2. 

To  obey  in  hope  of  eternal  life,  is  either  to  yield  obe- 
dience, in  hope  of  obtaining  eternal  life,  as  a  reward  pro- 
cured by,  or  proportioned  to  that  obedience  ;  and  so  no 
saint  of  God  since  the  fall  of  Adam,  did  yield  obedience  to 
God,  or  ought  to  have  so  done :  or  to  obey  in  hope  of  eternal 
life,  is  to  carry  along  with  us,  in  our  obedience,  a  hope  of 
the  enjoyment  of  the  promised  inheritance  in  due  time,  and 
to   be    encouraged    and  strengthened   in  obeying   thereby. 


IN    THIS    LIFE.  219 

Thus  the  saints  of  God  walk  with  God,  in  hope  and  obe- 
dience at  this  day ;  and  they  always  did  so  from  the  begin- 
ning. They  have  hope  in  and  with  their  obedience,  of  that 
whereunto  their  obedience  leads,  which  was  purchased  for 
them  by  Christ. 

'  Q.  Do  not  the  Scriptures  intimate  that  Christians  may 
attain  to  perfection  of  virtue  and  godliness,  and  that  it  is  the 
intention  of  God  and  Christ,  and  his  ministers,  to  bring  them 
to  this  pitch  ?  Rehearse  the  texts  to  this  effect. 

'A.  Eph.  i.4.' 

Not  to  make  long  work  of  that,  which  is  capable  of  a 
speedy  despatch ;  by  virtue  and  godliness,  Mr.  B.  under- 
stands that  universal  righteousness  and  holiness,  which  the 
law  requires ;  by  perfection  in  it,  an  absolute,  complete 
answerableness  to  the  law,  in  that  righteousness  and  holi- 
ness, both  as  to  the  matter  wherein  they  consist,  and  the 
manner  how  they  are  to  be  performed;  that  Christians  may 
attain,  expresses  a  power  that  is  reducible  into  act.  So  that 
the  intention  of  God  and  the  ministers^  is  not  that  they  should 
be  pressing  on  towards  perfection,  which  it  is  confessed,  we 
are  to  do,  whilst  we  live  in  this  world,  but  actually  in  this 
life,  to  bring  them  to  an  enjoyment  of  it.  In  this  sense,  we 
deny  that  any  man  in  this  life,  '  may  attain  to  a  perfection 
of  virtue  and  godliness.'    For, 

1.  All  our  works  are  done  out  of  faith;  1  Tim.  i,  5.  Gal. 
v.  6.  now  this  faith  is  the  faith  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  by 
Christ,  and  '  that  purifieth  the  heart ;'  Acts  xv.  8,  9.  But  the 
works  that  proceed  from  faith  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins  by 
Christ,  cannot  be  perfect  absolutely  in  themselves,  because 
in  the  very  rise  of  them,  they  expect  perfection  and  com- 
pleteness from  another. 

2.  Such  as  is  the  cause,  such  is  the  effect;  but  the  prin- 
ciple or  cause  of  the  saints  obedience  in  this  life  is  imper- 
fect ;  so  therefore  is  their  obedience.  That  our  sanctification 
is  imperfect  in  this  life,  the  apostle  witnesseth ;  2  Cor.  iv. 

16.  1  Cor.  xiii.  9. 

3.  Where  there  is  flesh  and  spirit,  there  is  not  perfection  : 
for  the  flesh  is  contrary  to  the  Spirit,  from  whence  our  per- 
fection must  proceed  if  we  have  any :  but  there  is  flesh  and 
Spirit  in  all  believers,  whilst  they  live  in  this  world;   Gal.  v. 

17.  Rom.  vii.  14. 

q2 


220  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

4.  They  that  are  not  without  sin,  are  not  absolutely 
perfect ;  for  to  be  perfect,  is  to  have  no  sin ;  but  the  saints 
in  this  life  are  not  without  sin;  1  John  i,  8.  Matt.  vi.  12. 
James  iii,  2.  Eccles.  vii.  21.  Isa.  Ixiv.  6.  but  to  what  end 
should  I  multiply  arguments  or  testimonies  to  this  purpose? 
If  all  the  saints  of  God  have  acknowledged  themselves 
sinners  all  their  days,  always  deprecated  the  justice  of  God, 
and  appealed  to  mercy  in  their  trial  before  God,  if  all  our 
perfection  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  we  are  justified  not 
by  the  works  of  the  law,  but  grace,  this  pharisaical  figment 
may  be  rejected  as  the  foolish  imagination  of  men  ignorant 
of  the  righteousness  of  God,  and  of  him  who  is  '  the  end  of 
the  law  for  righteousness  to  them  that  do  believe.' 

But  take  perfection  as  it  is  often  used  in  the  Scripture, 
and  ascribed  to  men  of  whom  yet  many  great  and  eminent 
failings  are  recorded  (which  certainly  were  inconsistent  with 
perfection  absolutely  considered) and  so  itdenotes  two  things: 
1.  Sincerity,  in  opposition  to  hypocrisy.  And  2.  Univer- 
sality, as  to  all  the  parts  of  obedience,  in  opposition  to  par- 
tiality, and  halving  with  God.  So  we  say,  perfection  is  not 
only  attainable  by  the  saints  of  God,  but  is  in  every  one  of 
them  ;  but  this  is  not  such  a  perfection  as  consists  in  a 
point,  which  if  it  deflects  from,  it  ceases  to  be  perfection; 
but  such  a  condition  as  admits  of  several  degrees,  all  lying 
in  a  tendency  to  that  perfection  spoken  of;  and  the  men 
of  this  perfection,  are  said  to  be  perfect  or  upright  in  the 
Scripture  ;  Psal.  xxxvii.  14.  cxix.  100,  &c. 

Not  then  to  insist  on  all  the  places  mentioned  by  Mr.  B. 
in  particular,  they  may  all  be  referred  to  four  heads  :  1.  Such 
as  mention  an  unblamableness  before  God  in  Christ,  which 
argues  a  perfection  in  Christ,  but  only  sincerity  in  us  ;  or  2. 
Such  as  mention  a  perfection  in '  fieri,'  but  not  in  *  facto  esse,' 
as  we  speak ;  a  pressing  towards  perfection,  but  not  a  per- 
fection obtained,  or  here  obtainable ;  or  3.  A  comparative 
perfection  in  respect  of  others  ;  or  a  perfection  of  sincerity, 
accompanied  with  universality  of  obedience,  consistent  with 
indwelling  sin  and  many  transgressions.  The  application 
of  the  several  places  mentioned  to  these  rules,  is  easy,  and 
lies  at  hand,  for  any  that  will  take  the  pains  to  consider 
them.     He  proceeds, 

'  If  works  be  so  necessary  to  salvation,  as  you  have  before 


IN    THIS    LIFE.  221 

shewed  from  the  Scripture,  how  conieth  it  to  pass  that 
Paul  saith.  We  are  justified  by  faith  without  works  ?  Meant 
he  to  exclude  all  good  works  whatsoever,  or  only  those 
of  the  law?  How  doth  he  explain  himself  ?  Rom.  ii.  2.  28. 
We  are  justified  by  faith,   without  the  works  of  the  law.' 

Ans.  1.  How,  and  in  what  sense  works  are  necessary  to  sal- 
vation, hath  been  declared,  and  therefore  I  remit  the  reader 
to  its  proper  place. 

2.  A  full  handling  of  the  doctrine  of  justification  was 
waved  before,  and  therefore  I  shall  not  here  take  it  up,  but 
content  myself  with  a  brief  removal  of  Mr.  B.'s  attempts  to 
deface  it.     I  say  then, 

3.  That  Paul  is  very  troublesome  to  all  the  Pharisees  of 
this  age,  who  therefore  turn  themselves  a  thousand  ways  to 
escape  the  authority  of  the  word  and  truth  of  God  (by  him 
fully  declared  and  vindicated  against  their  forefathers),  la- 
bouring to  fortify  themselves  with  distinctions,  which,  as 
they  suppose,  but  falsely,  the-ir  predecessors  were  ignorant 
of;  Paul  then,  this  Paul,  denies  all  works,  all  works  what- 
soever, to  have  any  share  in  our  justification  before  God,  as 
the  matter  of  our  righteousness,  or  the  cause  of  our  justifi- 
cation.    For, 

1.  He  excludes  all  works  of  the  law,  as  is  confessed. 
The  works  of  the  law  are  the  works  that  the  law  requires. 
Now  there  is  no  work  whatever  that  is  good  or  acceptable 
to  God,  but  it  is  required  by  the  law ;  so  that  in  excluding 
works  of  the  law,  he  excludes  all  works  whatever. 

2.  He  expressly  excludes  all  works  done  by  virtue  of 
grace,  and  after  calling  ;  which,  if  any,  should  be  exempted 
from  being  works  of  the  law.  For  though  the  law  requires 
them,  yet  they  are  not  done  from  a  principle,  nor  to  an  end 
of  the  law;  these  Paul  excludes  expressly  ;  Ephes.  viii.  9, 
10.  •  By  grace  we  are  saved,  not  of  works.'  What  works? 
Those  which  'we  are  created  unto  in  Christ  Jesus.' 

3.  All  works,  that  are  works,  are  excluded  expressly,  and 
set  in  opposition  to  grace  in  this  business  ;  Rom.  xi.  5,  6.  '  If 
it  be  of  grace,  it  is  no  more  of  works,  otherwise  grace  is  no 
more  grace  ;  but  if  it  be  of  works,  it  is  no  more  grace,  other- 
wise work  is  no  more  work  ;'  and  Rom.  iv.  3 — 5. 

4.  All  works  are  excluded  that  take  off  from  the  absolute 
freedom  of  the  justification  of  sinners  by  the  redemption 


222  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

that  is  in  Christ ;  Rom.  iii.  17—27.  Now  this  is  not  peculiar 
to  any  one  sort  of  works,  or  to  any  one  work,  more  than  to 
another,  as  might  be  demonstrated  ;  but  this  is  not  a  place 
for  so  great  a  work,  as  the  thorough  handling  of  this  doc- 
trine requires.     He  adds, 

'Can  you  make  it  appear  from  elsewhere,  that  Paul  in- 
tended to  exclude  from  justification,  only  the  perfect  works 
of  the  law,  which  leave  no  place  for  either  grace  or  faith, 
and  not  such  works  as  include  both,  and  that  by  a  justifying 
faith  he  meant  a  working  faith,  and  such  a  one  as  is  ac- 
companied with  righteousness  ? 

'A.  Eph.  ii.  8—10.  Rom.  iv.  3—5.  Rom.  xi.  5,  6.  iv.  14 
—16.  Gal.  V.  6.  Rom.  i.  17,  18.' 

Aris.  1 .  Still  Paul  and  his  doctrine  trouble  the  man  as  they 
did  his  predecessors.  That  Paul  excluded  all  works  of 
what  sort  soever,  from  our  justification,  as  precedaneous 
causes  or  conditions  thereof,  was  before  declared.  Mr.  B. 
would  only  have  it,  that  the  perfect  works  of  the  law  only 
are  excluded,  when  if  any  works  take  place  in  our  justifi- 
cation with  God,  those  only  may  be  admitted,  for  certainly, 
if  we  are  justified  or  pronounced  righteous  for  our  works, 
it  must  be  for  the  works  that  are  perfect,  or  else  the  judgment 
of  God  is  not  according  to  truth.  Those  only  it  seems  are 
excluded,  that  only  may  be  accepted  ;  and  imperfect  works 
are  substituted  as  the  matter  of  a  perfect  righteousness ; 
without  which,  none  shall  stand  in  the  presence  of  God.  But, 

2.  There  is  not  one  text  of  Scripture  mentioned  by  Mr.  B. 
whence  he  aims  to  evince  his  intention,  but  expressly  denies 
what  he  asserts  ;  and  sets  all  works  whatever  in  opposition 
to  grace,  and  excludes  them  all,  from  any  place  in  our  jus- 
tification before  God.  So  that  the  man  seems  to  have 
been  infatuated  by  his  pharisaisra,  to  give  direction  for  his 
own  condemnation.  Let  the  places  be  considered  by  the 
reader. 

3.  The  grace  mentioned  as  the  cause  of  our  justification, 
is  not  the  grace  of  God,  bringing  forth  good  works  in  us, 
which  stand  thereupon  in  opposition  to  the  works  of  the  law, 
as  done  in  the  strength  of  the  law,  but  the  free  favour  and 
srace  of  God  towards  us  in  Christ  Jesus,  which  excludes  all 
works  of  ours  whatever,  as  is  undeniably  manifest;  Rom,  iv. 
4.  xi.  5,  6. 


IN    THIS    LIFE..  223 

4.  It  is  true,  justifying  faith  is  a  living  faith,  purging 
the  heart,  working  by  love,  and  bringing  forth  fruits  of  obe- 
dience ;  but  that  its  fruits  of  love  and  good  works  have  any 
causal  influence  into  our  justification,  is  most  false.  We  are 
justified  freely  by  grace,  in  opposition  to  all  fruits  of  faith 
whatever,  which  God  hath  ordained  us  to  bring  forth.  That 
faith  whereby  we  are  justified,  will  never  be  without  works, 
yet  we  are  not  justified  by  the  works  of  it,  but  freely  by  the 
blood  of  Christ ;  how,  and  in  what  sense  we  are  justified  by 
faith  itself,  what  part,  office,  and  place,  it  hath  in  our  justifi- 
cation, its  consistency  in  its  due  place  and  office,  with 
Christ's  being  our  righteousness,  and  its  receiving  of  re- 
mission of  sins,  which  is  said  to  be  our  blessedness,  shall 
elsewhere,  God  assisting,  be  manifested. 

What  then  hath  Mr.  B.  yet  remaining  to  plead  in  this 
business?  the  old  abused  refuge  of  opposing  James  to  Paul, 
is  fixed  on.  This  is  the  beaten  plea  of  Papists,  Socinians, 
and  Arminians.'     Saith  he, 

•What  answer  then  would  you  give  to  a  man,  who  wrest- 
ing the  words  of  Paul  in  certain  places  of  his  Epistles  to  the 
Romans  and  Galatians  should  bear  you  in  hand,  that  all 
good  works  whatever,  are  excluded  from  justification  and  sal- 
vation, and  that  it  is  enough  only  to  believe  l  James  ii.  20 — 26.' 

j^ns.  1.  He  that  shall  exclude  good  works  from  salvation, 
so  as  not  to  be  the  way  and  means  appointed  of  God,  where-' 
in  we  ought  to  walk,  who  seek  and  expect  salvation  from 
God  ;  and  afiirms  that  it  is  enough  to  believe,  though  a  man 
bring  forth  no  fruits  of  faith  or  good  works;  if  he  pretend 
to  be  of  that  persuasion,  on  the  account  of  any  thing  de- 
livered by  Paul,  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Romans  or  Galatians, 
doth  wrest  the  words  and  sense  of  Paul,  and  is  well  confuted 
by  that  passage  mentioned  out  of  James. 

But  he  that  excluding  all  works  from  justification  in  the 
sense  declared,  affirming  that  it  is  by  faith  only,  without 
works;  and  affirms,  that  the  truth  and  sincerity  of  that  faith, 
with  its  efficacy  in  its  own  kind  for  our  justification,  is  evinced 
by  works,  and  the  man's  acceptation  with  God  thereon  justi- 
fied by  them,  doth  not  wrest  the  words  nor  sense  of  Paul,  and 
speaks  to  the  intendment  of  James. 

2.  Paul  instructs  us  at  large,  how  sinners  come  to  be 
justified  before  God,  and  this  is  his  professed  design  in  his 


224  OF    PERFECT    OBEDIENCE 

Epistles  to  the  Romans  and  Galatians.  James  professedly 
exhorting  believers  to  good  works,  demands  of  them,  how 
they  will  acquit  themselves  before  God  and  man  to  be  jus- 
tified ;  and  affirms  that  this  cannot  be  done,  but  by  works. 
Paul  tells  us  what  justification  is  ;  James  describes  justify- 
ing faith  by  its  effects  ;  but  of  this  also  elsewhere.  To  all 
this  he  subjoins  : 

'I  would  knowof  you,  who  is  ajust  or  righteous  man?  Is 
it  not  such  a  one  as  apprehendeth,  and  applieth  Christ's 
righteousness  to  himself,  or  at  most  desires  to  do  righteously ; 
is  not  he  accepted  of  God  ? 

'A.  1  John  iii.  7—10.  1  John  ii.  29.  Acts  x.34,35.  Ezek. 
xviii.  5 — 9.' 

Ans.  1.  He  to  whom  God  imputes  righteousness,  is  righte- 
ous. This  he  doth  to  him,'who  works  not,  butbelievesonhim 
who  justifies  the  ungodly;'  Rom.  iv.5 — 7.  there  is  then  a  righ- 
teousness without  the  works  of  the  law  ;  Phil.  iii.  10.  To 
apprehend  and  apply  Christ's  righteousness  to  ourselves,  are 
expressions  of  believing  unto  justification,  which  the  Scrip- 
ture will  warrant;  John  i.  12.  2  Cor.  i.  30.  He  that  believeth, 
so  as  to  have  Christ  made  righteousness  to  him,  to  have 
righteousness  imputed  to  him,  to  be  freely  justified  by  the 
redemption  that  is  in  the  blood  of  Jesus,  he  is  just :  and  this 
state  and  condition,  as  was  said,  is  obtained  by  applying  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  to  ourselves  ;  that  is,  by  receiving 
him,  and  his  righteousness  by  faith,  as  tendered  unto  us  in 
the  offer  and  promises  of  the  gospel. 

Of  desiring  to  do  righteously,  and  what  is  intended  by 
that  expression,  I  have  spoken  before.     But, 

2.  There  is  a  twofold  righteousness,  a  righteousness  im- 
puted whereby  we  are  justified,  and  a  righteousness  inhe- 
rent, whereby  we  are  sanctified.  These  Mr.  B.  would  op- 
pose, and  from  the  assertion  of  the  one,  argue  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  other  ;  though  they  sweetly,  and  eminently  com- 
ply in  our  communion  with  God.  The  other  righteousness 
was  before  evinced.  Even  our  sanctification  also  is  called 
righteousness,  and  we  are  said  to  be  just  in  that  respect. 

1.  Because  our  faith  and  interest  in  Christ  is  justified 
thereby  to  be  true,  and  such  as  will  abide  the  fiery  trial. 

2.  Because  all  the  acts  of  it  are  fruits  of  righteousness  ; 
Rom  vi.  19.22. 


IN    THIS    LIFE.  225 

3.  Because  it  stands  in  opposition  to  all  unrighteousness, 
and  he  that  doth  not  bring  forth  the  fruit  of  it,  is  unrigh- 
teous. 

4,  With  men,  and  before  them  it  is  all  our  righteousness ; 
and  of  this  do  the  places  mentioned  by  Mr.  Biddle  treat, 
without  the  least  contradiction  or  colour  of  it,  to  the  im- 
puted righteousness  of  Christ,  wherewith  we  are  righteous 
before' God. 

The  intendment  of  the  last  query  in  this  chapter,  is  to 
prove  the  apostacy  of  saints  ;  or  that  true  believers  may  fall 
away  totally  and  finally  from  grace.  I  suppose  it  will  not  be 
expected  of  me,  that  I  should  enter  here  into  a  particular 
consideration  of  the  places  by  him  produced,  having  lately 
at*  large  gone  through  the  consideration  of  the  whole  doc- 
trine opposed ;  wherein  not  only  the  texts  here  quoted  by 
Mr.  B.  but  many  others,  set  off  by  the  management  of  an 
able  head,  and  dexterous  hand,  are  at  large  considered;  thi- 
ther therefore  I  refer  the  reader. 

It  might  perhaps  have  been  expected,  that  having  insisted 
so  largely  as  I  have  done,  upon  some  other  heads  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  gospel  corrupted  by  Mr.  B.  and  his  companions, 
that  I  should  not  thus  briefly  have  passed  over  this  impor- 
tant article  of  faith,  concerning  justification  :  but  besides  my 
weariness  of  the  work  before  me,  I  have  for  a  defensative 
farther  to  plead,  that  this  doctrine  is  of  late  become  the  sub- 
ject of  very  many  polemical  discourses  ;  to  what  advantage 
of  truth,  time  will  shew,  and  1  am  not  willing  to  add  oil  to 
that  fire.  2.  That  if  the  Lord  will,  and  I  live,  I  intend  to  do 
something  purposely,  for  the  vindication  and  clearing  of 
the  whole  doctrine  itself;  and  therefore  am  not  willing  oc- 
casionally to  anticipate  here,  what  must  in  another  order  and 
method  be  insisted  on;  to  which  for  a  close,  I  add  a  desire, 
that  if  any  be  willing  to  contend  with  me  about  this  matter, 
he  would  forbear  exceptions  against  these  extemporary  ani- 
madversions, until  the  whole  of  my  thoughts  lie  before  him, 
unless  he  be  of  the  persons  principally  concerned  in  this 
whole  discourse,  of  whom  I  have  no  reason  to  desire  that 
respect  or  candour. 

»  Doctrine  of  the  Saints'  Perseverance  Vindicated. 


226  OF    PRAYER. 

CHAP.  XXXIV. 

Of  prayer ; 

And  whether  Christ  prescribed  a  form  of  prayer  to  he  used  hy  believers:  mid 
of  praying  unto  hint,  and  in  his  name  under  the  Old  TestanieJtt  ? 

The  first  question  is, 

'  Q.  Is  prayer  a  Christian  duty  ?  , 
'  A.  Pray  without  ceasing ;  1  Thess.  v.  17.' 
If  by  a  Christian  duty,  a  duty  whereunto  all  Christians 
are  obliged  is  understood,  we  grant  it  a  Christian  duty.  The 
commands  for  it,  encouragements  to  it,  promises  concerning 
it,  are  innumerable;  and  the  use  and  benefit  of  it,  in  our 
communion  with  God,  considering  the  state  and  condition 
of  sin,  emptiness,  want,  temptation,  trials  that  here  we  live 
in,  inestimable.  If  by  a  Christian  duty  it  be  intended  that 
it  is  required  only  of  them  who  are  Christians,  and  is  insti- 
tuted by  something  peculiar  in  Christian  religion,  it  is  de- 
nied. Prayer  is  a  natural  acknowledgement  of  God,  that 
every  man  is  everlastingly  and  indispensably  obliged  unto, 
by  virtue  of  the  law  of  his  creation,  though  the  matter  of  it 
be  varied  according  to  the  several  states  and  conditions 
whereunto  we  fall,  or  are  brought.  Every  one  that  lives  in 
dependancy  on  God,  and  hath  his  supplies  from  him,  is  by 
virtue  of  that  dependance  obliged  to  this  duty,  as  much  as 
he  is  to  own  God  to  be  his  God.     He  proceeds  : 

'  Q.  How  ought  men  to  pray?  A.  Lifting  up  holy  hands 
without  wrath  and  doubting;   1  Tim.  ii.  8.' 

The  inquiry  being  made  of  the  manner  of  acceptable 
prayer,  the  answer  given  respecting  only  one  or  two  par- 
ticulars, is  narrow  and  scanty.  The  qualification  of  the  per- 
son praying,  the  means  of  access  to  God,  the  cause  of  ac- 
ceptation with  him,  the  ground  of  our  confidence  in  our  sup- 
plications, the  eflicacy  of  the  Spirit  of  grace  as  promised, 
are  either  all  omitted,  or  only  tacitly  intimated.  But  this, 
and  many  of  the  following  questions,  with  the  answers,  being 
in  their  connexion  capable  of  a  good  and  fair  interpretation, 
though  all  be  not  expressed  that  the  Scripture  gives,  in  an- 
swer to  such  questions,  and  the  most  material  requisite  of 


OF    PRAYER.  %11 

prayer  in  the  Holy  Ghost  be  omitted,  yet  drawing  to  a  close 
I  shall  not  farther  insist  upon  them  ;  having  yet  that  remain- 
ing, which  requires  a  more  full  animadversion. 

*  Q.  Did  not  Christ  prescribe  a  form  of  prayer  to  his  dis- 
ciples, so  that  there  remaineth  no  doubt  touching  the  law- 
fulness of  using  a  form? 
*A.  Lukexi.  1— 4.' 

Alls.  If  Christ  prescribed  a  form  of  prayer  to  his  disci- 
ples, to  be  used  as  a  form  by  the  repetition  of  the  same 
words  ;  I  confess  it  will  be  out  of  question,  that  it  is  lawful 
to  use  a  form  :  but  that  it  is  lawful  not  to  use  a  form,  or  that 
a  man  may  use  any  prayer  but  a  form,  on  that  supposition, 
will  not  be  so  easily  determined.  The  words  of  Christ  are, 
'  When  you  pray,  say.  Our  Father'  Sec.  If  in  this  prescrip- 
tion, not  the  matter  only,  but  the  words  also  are  intended, 
and  that  form  of  them  which  follows  is  prescribed  to  be  used, 
by  virtue  of  this  command  of  Christ,  it  will  be  hard  to  dis- 
cover on  what  ground  we  may  any  otherwise  pray,  seeing 
our  Saviour's  command  is  positive,  'When  you  pray,  say. 
Our  Father,'  8cc. 

That  which  Mr.  B.  is  to  prove  is,  that  our  Saviour  hath 
prescribed  the  repetition  of  the  same  words  ensuing,  and 
when  he  hath  done  so,  if  so  he  can  do,  his  conclusion  must 
be,  that  that  form  ought  to  be  used,  not  at  all  that  any  else 
may.  If  our  Saviour  have  prescribed  us  a  form,  how  shall 
any  man  dare  to  prescribe  another?  Or  can  any  man  do  it 
without  casting  on  his  form  the  reproach  of  imperfection 
and  insufficiency?  Our  Saviour  hath  prescribed  us  a  form 
of  prayer  to  be  used  as  a  form  by  the  repetition  of  the  same 
words;  therefore  we  may  use-it,  yea,  we  must,  is  an  invin- 
cible argument,  on  supposition  of  the  truth  of  the  proposi- 
tion. But  our  Saviour  hath  prescribed  us  such  a  form,  &,c. 
therefore  we  may  use  another,  which  he  hath  not  prescribed, 
hath  neither  shew  nor  colour  of  reason  in  it. 

But  how  will  Mr.  B.  prove  that  Christ  doth  not  here  in- 
struct his  disciples  in  what  they  ought  to  pray  for,  and  for 
what  they  ought  in  prayer  to  address  themselves  to  God,  and 
under  what  considerations  they  are  to  look  on  God  in  their 
approaches  to  him  and  the  like,  only,  but  also  that  he  pre- 
scribes the  words  there  mentioned  by  him  to  be  repeated  by 
them  in  their  supplications.    Luke  xi.  he  bids  them  say, 


228  OF    PRAYER. 

•  Our  Father/  &c.  which  at  large  Matt.  vi.  is,  'pray,  after  this 
manner  :'  ovtwq  to  this  purpose.  I  do  not  think  the  prophet 
prescribes  a  form  of  words,  to  be  used  by  the  church  when 
he  says, '  Take  with  you  words,  and  turn  to  the  Lord,  and  say 
unto  him,  take  away  iniquity ;'  Hos.  xiv.  2.  but  rather  calls 
them  to  fervent  supplication  for  the  pardon  of  sin,  as  God 
should  enable  them  to  deal  with  him.  And  though  the  apo- 
stles never  prayed  for  any  thing,  but  what  they  were  for  the 
substance  directed  to  by  this  prayer  of  our  Saviour,  yet  we 
do  not  find,  that  ever  they  repeated  the  very  words  here  men- 
tioned, or  once  commanded  or  prescribed  the  use  of  them, 
to  any  of  the  saints  in  their  days,  whom  they  exhorted  to 
pray  so  fervently  and  earnestly.  Nor  in  any  of  the  rules 
and  directions,  that  are  given  for  our  praying,  either  in  re- 
ference to  ourselves,  or  him,  by  whom  we  have  access  to 
God,  is  the  use  of  these  words  at  any  time  in  the  least  re- 
commended to  us,  or  recalled  to  mind,  as  a  matter  of  duty. 
Our  Saviour  says,  '  When  ye  pray,  say.  Our  Father  ;'  on 
supposition  of  the  sense  contended  for,  and  that  a  form  of 
words  is  prescribed,  I  ask  whether  we  may  at  any  time  pray, 
and  not  say  so;  seeing  he  says,  When  you  pray,  say  :  whe- 
ther we  may  say  any  thing  else,  or  use  any  other  words  ? 
Whether  the  saying  of  these  words  be  a  part  of  the  worship 
of  God  ?  Or  whether  any  promise  of  acceptation  be  annexed 
to  the  saying  so  ?  Whether  the  Spirit  of  grace  and  suppli- 
cation be  not  promised  to  all  believers?  And  whether  he  be 
not  given  them  to  enable  them  to  pray,  both  as  to  matter 
and  manner?  And  if  so,  whether  the  repetition  of  the  words 
mentioned  by  them,  who  have  not  the  Spirit  given  them  for 
the  ends  before  mentioned,  be  available?  And  whether 
prayer  by  the  Spirit  where  these  words  are  not  repeated,  as 
to  the  letters  and  syllables,  and  order  wherein  they  stand, 
be  acceptable  to  God  ?  Whether  the  prescription  of  a  form 
of  words,  and  the  gift  of  a  spirit  of  prayer  be  consistent? 
Whether  the  form  be  prescribed  because  believers  are  not 
able  to  pray  without  it?  Or  because  there  is  a  peculiar  ho- 
liness, force,  and  energy  in  the  letters,  words,  and  syllables, 
as  they  stand  in  that  form?  And  whether  to  say  the  first  of 
those  be  not  derogatory  to  the  glory  of  God,  and  efficacy  of 
the  Spirit,  promised  and  given  to  believers  ;  and  the  second, 
to  assert  the  using  of  a  charm  in  the  worship  of  God  ?  Whe- 


OF    PRAYER.  229 

ther  in  that  respect  *  Pater  noster'  be  not  as  good  as  *  Our 
Father?'  Whether  innumerable  poor  souls  are  not  deluded 
and  hardened  by  satisfying  their  consciences  in,  and  with  the 
use  of  this  form  never  knowing  what  it  is  to  pray  in  the 
Holy  Ghost?  And  whether  the  asserting  this  form  of 
words  to  be  used,  have  not  confirmed  many  in  their  atheis- 
tical blaspheming  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  and  his  grace 
in  the  prayers  of  his  people  ?  And  whether  the  repetition  of 
these  words,  after  men  have  been  long  praying  for  the  things 
contained  in  them,  as  the  manner  of  some  is,  be  not  so  remote 
from  any  pretence  or  colour  of  warrant  in  the  Scipture,  as 
that  it  is  in  plain  terms  ridiculous  ?  When  Mr.  Biddle,  or 
any  on  his  behalf,  hath  answered  these  questions,  they  may 
be  supplied  with  more  of  the  like  nature  and  importance. 

Of  our  address  with  all  our  religious  worship  to  the  Fa- 
ther, by  Jesus  Christ  the  Mediator,  how  and  in  what  manner 
we  do  so,  and  in  what  sense  he  is  himself  the  ultimate  object 
of  divine  worship,  I  have  spoken  before;  and  therefore  5 
shall  not  need  to  insist  on  his  next  question,  which  makes 
some  inquiry  thereabout.  That  which  follows  is  all  that 
in  this  chapter  needs  any  animadversion.  The  words  are 
these : 

*Q.  Was  it  the  custom  during  the  time  that  Christ  con- 
versed on  the  earth  (much  less  before  he  came  into  the  world) 
to  pray  unto  God  in  the  name  of  Christ,  or  through  Christ  ? 
Or  did  it  begin  to  be  used  after  the  resurrection  and  exalta- 
tion of  Christ?  What  saith  Christ  himself  concerning  this? 

'A.  John  xvi.  24— 26.' 

The  time  of  the  saints  in  this  world  are  here  distinguish- 
ed into  different  seasons:  that  before  Christ's  coming  in  the 
flesh, the  time  ofhis  conversation  on  earth,  andthe  time  fol- 
lowing his  resurrection  and  exaltation.  What  was  the  cus- 
tom in  these  several  seasons  of  praying  to  God  in  the  name 
of  Christ,  or  through  him,  is  inquired  after ;  and  as  to  the  first 
and  second  it  is  denied,  granted  as  to  the  latter,  which  is 
farther  confirmed  in  the  answer  to  the  last  question,  from 
Heb.  xiii.  20,  21.  Some  brief  observations  will  disentangle 
Mr.  B.'s  catechumens,  if  they  shall  be  pleased  to  attend  unto 
them. 

1.  It  is  not  what  was  the  custom  of  men  to  do,  but  what 
was  the  mind  of  God  that  they  should  do,  that  we  inquire 


230  OF    PRAYER. 

after.  2.  That  Jesus  Christ,  in  respect  of  his  divine  nature, 
wherein  he  is  one  with  his  Father,  was  always  worshipped 
and  invocated,  ever  since  God  made  any  creatures  to  worship 
him,  hath  been  formerly  declared.  3.  That  there  is  a  two- 
fold knowledge  of  Christ  the  Mediator :  one  in  general,  m 
thesi,  of  a  Mediator,  the  Messiah  promised,  which  was  the 
knowledge  of  the  saints  under  the  Old  Testament.  2.  Par- 
ticular, in  hypothesi,  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  that  Mes- 
siah, which  also  was  known,  and  is  to  the  saints  under  the 
New  Testament.  4.  That  as  to  an  explicit  knowledge  of 
the  way  and  manner  of  salvation,  which  was  to  be  wrought, 
accomplished,  and  brought  about  by  the  Messias,  the  pro- 
mised seed  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  address  of  men  unto  God 
by  him,  it  was  much  more  evidently  and  clearly  given  after 
the  resurrection  and  the  ascension  of  Christ,  than  before  : 
the  Spirit  of  revelation  being  then  poured  out  in  a  more 
abundant  manner  than  before.  5.  There  is  a  twofold  pray- 
ing unto  God  in  the  name  of  Christ.  One  in  express  words, 
clear  and  distinct  intention  of  mind,  insisting  on  his  medi- 
ation, and  our  acceptance  with  God  on  his  account.  The 
other  implied  in  all  acts  of  faith,  and  dependance  on  God, 
wherein  we  rely  on  him,  as  the  means  of  our  access  to  God. 
I  say,  these  things  being  premised,  1.  That  before 
Christ's  coming  into  the  world,  the  saints  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment did  pray,  and  were  appointed  of  God  to  pray  in  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ,  inasmuch  as  in  all  their  addresses 
unto  God  they  leaned  on  him  (as  promised  to  them),  through 
whom  they  were  to  receive  the  blessing,  and  to  be  blessed ; 
believing  that  they  should  be  accepted  on  his  account. 
This  was  virtually  prayer  to  God  in  the  name  of  Christ,  or 
through  him.  This  is  evident  from  the  tenor  of  the  cove- 
nant wherein-  they  walked  with  God  ;  in  which  they  were 
called  to  look  to  the  seed  of  the  woman,  to  expect  the  bless- 
ing in  the  seed  of  Abraham  :  speaking  of  the  seed  as  of 
one  and  not  of  many ;  as  also  by  all  their  types  and  sacri- 
fices wherein  they  had  by  God's  institution  respect  to  him, 
with  Abraham,  by  faith  even  as  we ;  so  that  whether  we  con- 
sider the  promise,  on  the  account  whereof  they  came  to  God, 
which  was  of  Christ,  and  of  blessing  in  him ;  or  the  means 
whereby  they  came,  which  were  sacrifices,  and  types  of  him; 
or  the  confidence  wherein  they  came,  which  was  of  atone- 


OF     PRAYER,  231 

ment  and  forgiveness  of  sin  by  him,  it  is  evident,  that  all 
their  prayers  were  made  to  God  in  the  name  of  Christ,  and 
not  any  upon  any  other  account.  And  one  of  them  is  ex- 
press in  terms  to  this  purpose  ;  Dan.  ix.  17.  If  they  had  any 
promise  of  him,  if  any  covenant  in  him,  if  any  types  repre- 
senting him,  if  any  light  of  him,  if  any  longing  after  him, 
if  any  benefit  by  him  or  fruit  of  his  mediation,  all  their 
worship  of  God  was  in  him,  and  through  him. 

2.  For  them  who  lived  with  him  in  the  days  of  his  flesh, 
their  faith  and  worship  was  of  the  same  size  and  measure 
with  theirs  that  went  before  ;  so  was  their  address  to  God 
in  the  same  manner,  and  on  the  same  account ;  only  in  this 
was  their  knowledge  enlarged,  that  they  believed,  that,  that 
individual  person  was  he  who  was  promised,  and  on  whom 
their  fathers  believed.  And  therefore,  they  prayed  to  him 
for  all  mercies  spiritual  and  temporal,  whereof  they  stood 
in  need,  as  to  be  saved  in  a  storm,  to  have  their  faith  in- 
creased, and  the  like,  though  they  had  not  expressly,  and 
clearly  made  mention  of  his  name  in  their  supplications. 
And  that  is  the  sense  of  our  Saviour  in  the  place  of  John 
insisted  on,  *  Hitherto  ye  have  asked  nothing  in  my  name  ;' 
that  is,  expressly,  and  in  direct  application  of  the  promises 
made  in  the  Messiah  unto  him,  though  they  had  their  ac- 
cess to  God  really  and  virtually,  by  and  through  him,  in  all 
the  ways  before  expressed.  And  indeed,  to  evidence  the 
glory  of  the  presence  of  the  Spirit,  when  poured  forth  upon 
them  with  a  fulness  of  gifts  and  graces,  such  things  are  re- 
corded of  their  ignorance  and  darkness  in  the  mysteries  of 
the  worship  of  God,  that  it  is  no  great  wonder,  if  they  who 
were  then  also  to  be  detained  under  the  judaical  pedagogue 
for  a  season,  had  not  received  as  yet,  such  an  improvement 
of  faith,  as  to  ask  and  pray  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  as 
exhibited,  which  was  one  of  the  great  privileges  reserved 
for  the  days  of  the  gospel.  And  this  is  all  that  Mr.  B.  gives 
occasion  unto  in  this  chapter. 


232  OF    THE    RESURKECTION. 


CHAP.  XXXV. 

Of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  the  stale  of  the  wicked  at  the  last  day. 

In  his  last  chapter,  Mr.  Biddle  strives  to  make  his  friends 
amends  for  all  the  wrong  he  had  done  them  in  those  fore- 
going. Having  attempted  to  overthrow  their  faith,  and  to 
turn  them  aside  from  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel;  he  now 
informs  them,  that  the  worst  that  can  happen  to  them,  if 
they  follow  his  counsel,  is  but  to  be  annihilated,  or  utterly 
deprived  of  their  being,  body  and  soul,  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment. For  that  everlasting  fire,  those  endless  torments, 
wherewith  tjiey  have  been  so  scared  and  terrified  formerly 
by  the  catechisms  and  preachings  of  men  that  left  and  for- 
sook the  Scripture,  it  is  all  but  a  fable,  invented  to  affright 
fools  and  children.  On  this  account  he  lets  his  followers 
know,  that  if  rejecting  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  and  his 
righteousness,  they  may  not  go  to  heaven,  yet  as  to  hell,  or 
an  everlasting  abode  in  torments,  they  may  be  secure  ;  there 
is  no  such  matter  provided  for  them,  nor  any  else.  This  is 
the  main  design  in  this_ chapter,  whose  title  is,  'Of  the  re- 
surrection of  the  dead,  and  the  last  judgment,  and  what 
shall  be  the  final  condition  of  the  righteous  and  wicked 
thereupon.' 

The  first  questions  lead  only  to  answers,  that  there  shall 
be  a  resurrection  of  the  dead  in  general ;  that  they  shall  be 
raised  and  judged  by  Christ,  who  hath  received  authority 
from  God  to  that  purpose,  that  being  the  last  great  work 
that  he  shall  accomplish  by  virtue  of  his  mediatory  king- 
dom committed  to  him.  Some  snares  seem  to  be  laid  in 
the  way  in  his  questions,  being  captiously  proposed ;  but 
they  have  been  formerly  broken  in  pieces  in  the  chapters  of- 
the  Deity  of  Christ,  and  his  person ;  whither  I  remit  the 
reader  if  he  find  himself  entangled  with  them. 

I  shall  only  say  by  the  way,  that  if  Mr.  B.  may  be  ex- 
pounded by  his"  masters,  he  will  scarce  be  found  to  give  so 

a  Deinde  negant  resurrectionem  carnis  ;  hoc  est,  hujus  ipsius  corporis,  quod  came 
ac  sanguine  praeditum  est,etsi  fateantur  corpora  esse  resurrectura,  h.  e.  ipsos  homi- 
nes fideles;  qui  tunc  novis  corporibus  calestibus  induendi  sunt.  Conipendiolum 
Doctrin.  Eccles.  in  Polon. 


OF    THE    RESUIIIIECTION.  233 

clear  an  assent  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  as  is  here 
pretended  ;  that  is  to  a  raising  again  of  the  same  individual 
body,  for  the  substance,  and  all  substantial  parts.  This  his 
masters  think  not  possible;  and  therefore  reject  it,  though 
it  be  never  so  expressly  affirmed  in  the  Scripture.  But  Mr. 
Biddle  is  silent  of  this  discovery  made  by  his  masters,  and 
so  shall  I  be  also. 

That  wherewith  I  am  to  deal  he  enters  upon  in  this  ques- 
tion. '  Shall  not  the  wicked  and  unbelievers  live  for  ever, 
though  in  torments,  as  well  as  the  godly  and  faithful  ?  or  is 
eternal  life  peculiar  to  the  faithful  ?  A.  John  iii.  36.' 

The  assertion  herein  couched  is,  that  the''  wicked  shall 
not  live  for  ever  in  torments  :  and  the  proof  of  it  is,  because 
eternal  life  is  promised  only  to  the  faithful  ;  yea,  *  he  that 
hath  not  the  Son  shall  never  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God 
abideth  on  him;'  John  iii.  36.  As  to  the  assertion  itself  we 
shall  attend  farther  unto  it  instantly. 

When"^  Socinus  first  broached  this  abomination,  he  did 
it  with  the  greatest  cunning  and  sleight  that  possibly  he 
could  use  ;  labouring  to  insinuate  it  insensibly  into  the 
minds  of  men  ;  knowing  full  well  how  full  of  scandal  the 
very  naming  of  it  would  prove  ;  but  the  man's  success  was 
in  most  things  beyond  his  own  imagination. 

For  the  proof  insinuated,  life,  and  eternal  life  in  the 
gospel,  as  they  are  mentioned  as  the  end  and  reward  of  our 
obedience,  are  not  taken  merely  physically,  nor  do  express 
only  the  abode,  duration,  and  continuance  of  our  being,  but 
our  continuance  in  a  state  and  condition  of  blessedness  and 
glory.  This  is  so  evident,  that  there  is  no  one  place,  where 
life  to  come,  or  eternal  life,  are  spoken  of  simply  in  the  whole 

*>  Itaque  iiegant  cruciatus  impioruni  et  diabolorum  duraturos  esse  in  ffiternura,  ve- 
riim  ou;nes  siiiuil  penitus  esse  abolcndos ;  adeo  ut  mors  et  infernus  ipse  dicantur 
conjiciendi  in  stagmini  iliud  ardens  ;  Ap.  10.  Rationem  adduiit,  quod  absurdum  sit, 
Deuni  irasci  in  Betcrnuni ;  et  peccata  crcaturaruiii  finita,  poenis  infinitis  mulctare  : 
prsBsertini  cum  hipc  nulla  ipsius  gloria  illustretur.  Compen.  Doct.  Eccies.  in  Polon. 

•^  Nam  quod  ais,  ea  ibi,  turn  de  Christianoruin  resurrectione,  turn  de  morte  iin- 
piorum  passim  contineli,  quse  a  niultis  sine  magna  offensione,  turn  nostris  turn  aliis, 
legi  non  possint;  scio  equideni  ea  ibi  coiitineri,  sed  meo  judicio  nee  passim,  nec 
ita  aperte  (cavi  cnim  islud  quantum  polui)  ut  quisquam  vir  pius  facile  offendi  pos- 
sit,  adeo  ut  quod  nominatim  attinet  ad  impioruni  mortem,  in  quo  dogmate  majus  est 
niulto  offensionis  periculum,  ea  potius  ex  iiscolligi  possit,quiE  ibi  disputantur,  quani 
exprcsse  litoris  consignala  extet ;  adeo  ut  lector,  qui  alioqui  seiUentiam  meam  ad- 
t'crsus  Puccium  de  mortaiitate  primi  liominis,  quae  toto  libro  agitatur,  qua'que  ob 
non  paucos  quos  habet  fautores  parum  aut  nihil  olFensionis  parere  potest,  probandara 
censeat,  prius  sentiat  doctrinam  istain  sibi  jam  persuasam  esse,  r[uam  suaderi  animad- 
vertat.  Faust.  Socin.  Epist.  ad  Johan.  Volkel.  6.  p.  491. 

VOL.    IX.  R 


234  OF    THE    RESURRECTION. 

New  Testament,  but  as  they  are  a  reward,  and  a  blessed 
condition  to  be  obtained  by  Jesus  Christ.  In  this  sense 
we  confess  the  wicked  and  impenitent  shall  never  see  life, 
nor  obtain  eternal  life,  that  is,  they  shall  never  come  to  a 
fruition  of  God  to  eternity  ;  but  that  therefore  they  shall 
not  have  a  life  or  being,  though  in  torments,  is  a  wild  in- 
ference. 1  desire  to  know  of  Mr.  B.  whether  the  evil  angels 
shall  be  consumed  or  no,  and  have  an  utter  end  ?  If  he- 
say  they  shall,  he  gives  us  one  new  notion  more  :  if  not,  I 
ask  him  whether  they  shall  have  eternal  life  or  no  ?  If  he 
says  they  shall  not  enjoy  eternal  life  in  the  sense  mentioned 
in  the  Scripture  ;  I  shall  desire  him  to  consider,  that  men 
also  may  have  their  being  preserved  and  yet  not  be  par- 
takers of  eternal  life  in  that  sense  wherein  it  is  promised. 

The  proof  insisted  on  by  Mr.  Biddle,  says,  that  the  wrath 
of  God  abides  upon  unbelievers,  even  then  when  they  do 
not  see  life ;  now  if  they  abide  not,  how  can  the  wrath  of 
God  abide  on  them?  doth  God  execute  his  wrath  upon  that 
which  is  not  ?  if  they  abide  under  wrath,  they  do  abide. 
Under  wrath  doth  not  diminish  from  their  abiding,  but  de- 
scribes its  condition. 

Death  and  life  in  Scripture,  ever  since  the  giving  of  the 
first  law,  and  the  mention  made  of  them  therein,  as  they 
express  the  condition  of  man  in  way  of  reward  or  punish- 
ment, are  not  opposed  naturally,  but  morally  ;  not  in  re- 
spect of  their  being  (if  I  may  so  say)  and  relation,  as  one  is 
the  privation  of  the  other  in  the  way  of  nature ;  but  in  re- 
spect of  the  state  and  condition  which  is  expressed  by  the 
one  and  the  other,  viz.  of  blessedness  or  misery.  So  that 
as  there  is  an  eternal  life,  which  is  as  it  were  a  second  life, 
a  life  of  glory  following  a  life  of  grace,  so  there  is  an  eter- 
nal death,  which  is  the  second  death,  a  death  of  misery  fol- 
lowing a  death  of  sin. 

The  death  that  is  threatened  and  which  is  opposed  to 
life,  and  eternal  life,  doth  not  any  where  denote  annihilation, 
but  only  a  deprivation  and  coming  short  of  that  blessedness 
which  is  promised  with  life,  attended  with  all  the  evils  which 
come  under  that  name,  and  are  in  the  first  commination. 
Those  who  are  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  are  not  nothing, 
though  they  have  no  life  of  grace.  Sut  Mr.  Biddle  proceeds, 
and  saith, 


OF    THE    RESURRECTION.  235 

'Though  this  passage  which  you  have  quoted  seems 
clearly  to  prove  that  eternal  life  agreeth  to  no  other  men  but 
the  faithful,  yet,  since  the  contrary  opinion  is  generally  held 
among  Christians,  I  would  fain  know  of  you  whether  you 
have  any  other  places  that  affirm  that  the  wicked  die  di- 
rectly, and  that  a  second  death,  are  destroyed  and  punished 
with  everlasting  destruction,  are  corrupted,  burnt  up,  de- 
voured, slain,  pass  away,  and  perish  ? 

'A.  Rom.  vi.  23.  viii.  13.  Rev.  xxi.  6.  8.  ii.  10,  11. 
1  Thess.  V.  3.  2  Pet,  iii.  7.  2  Thess.  i.  7—9  .Gal.  vi.  8.  2  Pet. 
ii.  12.  1  Cor.  iii.  17.  Heb.  x.  39.  Matt.  iii.  12.  Heb.  x.  26, 
27.  Luke  xix.  27.  1  John  ii.  17.  2  Cor.  ii.  15,  16.' 

1.  How  well  Mr.  B.  hath  proved  his  intention  by  the  place 
of  Scripture  before-mentioned,  hath  been  in  part  discovered, 
and  will  in  our  process  yet  farther  appear.  The  ambiguity 
of  the  word  *  life,'  and  '  eternal  life'  (which  yet  is  not  ambi- 
guous in  the  Scripture,  being  constantly  used  in  one  sense 
and  signification,  as  to  the  purpose  in  hand),  is  all  the  pre- 
tence he  hath  for  his  assertion  besides  that,  his  proof  that 
unbelievers  do  not  abide,  lies  in  this,  that  the  wrath  of  God 
abides  on  them. 

2.  This  is  common  with  this  gentleman  and  his  masters  ; 
Christians  generally  think  otherwise,  but  we  say  thus ;  so 
slight  do  they  make  of  the  common  faith  which  was  once 
delivered  to  the  saints.  But  he  may  be  pleased  to  take  no- 
tice, that  not  only  Christians  think  so,  but  assuredly  believe 
that  it  shall  be  so,  having  the  express  word  of  God  to  bottom 
that  their  faith  upon.  And*^  not  only  Christians  believe  it, 
but  mankind  generally  in  all  ages  consented  to  it;  as  might 
abundantly  be  evinced. 

3.  But  let  the  expressions  wherewith  Mr.  B.  endeavours 
to  make  good  this  his  monstrous  assertion  of  the  anniliilation 
of  the  wicked  and  unbelievers  at  the  last  day,  be  particularly 
considered,  that  the  strength  of  his  conclusion,  or  rather 
the  weakness  of  it,  may  be  discovered. 

The  first  is  that  they  are  said  to  die,  and  that  the  second 
death;  Rom.  vi.  23.  viii.  13.  Rev.  xxi.  6.  8.  ii.  10,  11.  but 
how  now  will  Mr.  B.  prove  that  by  dying  is  meant  the 
annihilation  of  body  and  soul?  There  is  mention  of  a  natural 

"^  Ktil  TO  dva^iMTKirBai,  not  in  t£v  TeS'vioTaJV  touj  ^cUvrat;  yiyvicr^ai  xai  raj  tSiv  ri^vsoruv 
■4'i>pfa?  ETvai,  Ktti  TttK  jM-EV  aj/tt9tt~c  afASivov  sTvat,  ra~g  xanaTi;  Kaxtov.     Plato  in  Plinedo, 

K    2 


236  OF    THE    RESURRECTION. 

death  in  Scripture,  which,  though  it  be  a  dissolution  of 
nature,  as  to  its  essential  parts  of  body  and  soul,  yet  it  is  an 
annihilation  of  neither ;  for  the  soul  abides,  and  Mr.  B.  pro- 
fesses to  believe  that  the  body  shall  rise  again.  There  is  a 
spiritual  death  in  sin  also  mentioned,  which  is  not  a  de- 
struction of  the  dead  person's  being,  but  a  moral  condition 
wherein  he  is.  And  why  must  the  last  death  be  the  annihi- 
lation pretended  ?  As  to  a  coming  short  of  that  which  is  the 
proper  life  of  the  soul  in  the  enjoyment  of  God,  which  is 
called  life  absolutely,  and  eternal  life,  it  is  a  death.  And  as 
to  any  comfortable  attendances  of  a  being  continued,  it  is  a 
death.  That  it  is  a  total  deprivation  of  being,  seeing  those 
under  it  are  to  eternity  to  abide  under  torments  (as  shall  be 
shewed),  there  is  no  colour. 

2.  It  is  called  *  destruction;'  and  '  perdition,'  and  '  ever- 
lasting destruction;'  1  Thess.  v.  3.  2  Pet.  iii.  7.  2Thess.i. 
7 — 9.  True,  it  is  a  destruction  as  to  the  utter  casting  men  off 
all  and  every  thing  wherein  they  had  any  hope  or  depend- 
ance;  a  casting  them  eternally  off  from  the  happiness  of 
rational  cre'^tures,  and  the  end  which  they  ought  to  have 
aimed  at  ;  that  is,  they  shall  be  destroyed  in  a  moral,  not 
a  natural  sense  ;  to  be  cast  for  ever  under  the  wrath  of  God, 
I  think,  is  destruction,  and  therefore  it  is  called  'everlasting 
destruction,'  because  of  the  punishment  which  in  that  de- 
struction abideth  on  them.  To  this  are  reduced  the  fol- 
lowing expressions  of  utterly  perishing,  and  the  like ;  Gal. 
vi.  8.  2  Pet.  ii.  12.  1  Cor.  iii.  17.  2  Pet.  iii.  16. 

3.  '  Burning  up  the  chaff  with  unquenchable  fire,'  is  men- 
tioned. Matt.  iii.  12.  but  if  this  burning  of  the  chaff  do 
consume  it,  pray  what  need  it  be  done  with  '  fire  that  cannot 
be  quenched  V  When  it  hath  done  its  work,  it  will  surely 
be  put  out.  The  expression  is  metaphorical,  and  the  allusion 
is  not  in  the  consumption  of  chaff  in  the  fire,  but  in  the 
casting  it  into  the  fire  ;  or  the  setting  fire  unto  it.  So  the 
fiery  indignation  is  said,  to  *  devour  the  adversaries;'  not  that 
they  shall  no  more  be,but  that  they  shall  never  see  happiness 
any  more.  All  these  expressions  being  metaphorical,  and 
used  to  set  out  the  greatness  of  the  wrath  and  indignation  of 
God  against  impenitent  sinners,  under  which  they  shall  lie 
for  ever.  The  residue  of  the  expressions  collected  are  of 
the  same  importance.     Christ's  punishment  of  unbelievers 


OF    THE    RESURRECTION.  237 

at  the  last  day,  is  compared  to  a  king  saying,  '  bring  hither 
mine  enemies,  and  slay  them  before  me;'  Luke  xix.  27.  be- 
cause as  a  natural  death  is  the  utmost  punishment  that  men 
are  able  to  inflict,  which  cuts  men  off  from  hopes  and  enjoy- 
ments, as  to  their  natural  condition,  so  Christ  will  lay  on 
them  the  utmost  of  his  wrath,  cutting  them  off  from  all  hopes 
and  enjoyments  as  to  their  spiritual  and  moral  condition.  It 
is  said,  the  '  fashion  of  this  world  passeth  away  ;'  1  John  ii. 
17.  because  it  can  give  no  abiding  continuing  refreshment  to 
any  of  the  sons  of  men;  when  he  that  doth  the  will  of  God 
hath  an  everlasting  continuance  in  a  good  condition,  not- 
withstanding the  intervening  of  all  troubles,  which  are  in 
this  life.  But  that  wicked  men  have  not  thei'r  being  con- 
tinued to  eternity,  nothing  is  here  expressed. 

A  very  few  words  will  put  an  issue  to  this  controversy, 
if  our  blessed  Saviour  rnay  be  accepted  for  an  umpire  ;  saith 
he,  Matt.  xxv.  46.  '  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting- 
punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life  eternal :'  certainly 
he  that  shall  be  everlastingly  punished,  shall  be  everlast- 
ingly. His  punishment  shall  not  continue,  when  he  is  not. 
He  that  hath  an  end,  cannot  be  everlastingly  punished. 
Again,  saith  our  Saviour,  in  hell  the  '  fire  shall  never  be 
quenched  ;  where  the  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched;'  Matt.  ix.  43,  44.  which  he  repeats  again,  ver. 
46.  and,  that  Mr.  B.  may  not  cause  any  to  hope  the  con- 
trary, again  ver.  48.  This  adds  to  the  former  miracle,  that 
men  should  be  punished  and  yet  not  be  ;  that  they  shall  be 
punished  by  the  stings  of  a  worm  to  torment  them  when 
they  are  not,  and  the  burning  of  a  (ire,  when  their  whole  es- 
sence is  consumed.  So  also  Isa.  Ixvi.  24.  their  torments 
shall  be  endless,  and  the  means  of  their  torments  continued 
for  ever ;  but  for  themselves,  it  seems,  they  shall  have  an 
end,  as  to  their  being ;  and  so  nothing  shall  be  punished 
with  an  everlasting  worm,  and  a  fire  never  to  be  quenched. 
Nay,  which  is  more,  there  shall  be  amongst  them  '  weeping, 
and  wailing,  and  gnashing  of  teeth;'  Matt,  viii,  12.  the 
utmost  sorrow  and  indignation  expressible,  yea,  beyond  ex- 
pression ;  and  yet  they  shall  not  be.  God  threatens  men 
with  death  and  destruction,  and  describes  that  death  and 
destruction  to  consist  in  the  abiding  under  his  wrath  in 
endless    torments ;    which    inexpressible    sorrow   evidently 


238  OF    THE    RESURRECTION. 

shews  that  death  is  not  a  consumption  of  them  as  to  the 
continuance  of  their  being,  but  a  deprivation  of  all  the  good 
of  life  natural,  spiritual,  and  eternal ;  with  an  infliction  of 
the  greatest  evils  that  they  can  be  capacitated  to  endure 
and  undergo,  called  their  destruction  and  perdition.* 

What  hath  been  the  intention  and  design  of  Mr.  B.  in 
this  his  catechism,  which  I  have  thus  far  considered,  I  shall 
not  judge.     There  is  one  lawgiver,  to  whom  both  he  and  I 
must  give  an  account  of  our  labour,  and  endeavours  in  this 
business:  That  the  tendency  of  the  work  itself  is  to  increase 
infidelity  and  sin  in  the  world,  I  dare  aver.  Let  this  chapter 
be  an  instance,  and  from  the  savour  that  it  hath,  let  a  taste 
be  taken  of  the  whole  ;  and  its  nature  be  thereby  estimated. 
That  the  greatest  part  of  them  to  whom  the  mind  of  God,  as 
revealed  in  Scripture,  is  in  some  measure  made  known,  are 
not  won  and  prevailed  upon  by  the  grace,  love,  and  mercy, 
proclaimed  therein,  and  tendered  through  Christ,  so  as  to 
give  up  themselves  in  all  holy  obedience  unto  God,  I  sup- 
pose will  be  granted.  That  these  men  are  yet  so  overpowered 
by  the  terror  of  the  Lord  therein  discovered,  and  the  threats 
of  the  wrath  to  come,  as  not  to  dare  to  run  out  to  the  utmost, 
that  the  desperate  thoughts  of  their  own  hearts,  and  the 
temptations  of  Satan  meeting  in  conjunction,  would  carry 
them  out  unto,  as  it  hath  daily  and  manifold  experiences  to 
evince  it ;  so  the  examples  of  men  so  awed  by  conviction, 
mentioned  in  the  Scripture,  do  abundantly  manifest.     Now 
what  is  it  among  all  the  considerations  of  the  account  that 
men  are  to  make  and  the  judgment  which  they  are  to  undergo, 
which  doth  so  amaze  their  souls,  and  fill  them  with  horror 
and  astonishment,  so  strike  off  their  hands  when  they  are 
ready  to  stretch  them  out  to  violence  and  uncleanness  ;  or 
so  frequently  makes  their  conception  of  sin  abortive,  as  this 
of  the  eternity  of  their  punishment,  which  impenitent  sin- 
ners must  undergo.     Is  not  this  that  which  makes  bitter  the 
otherwise  sweet  morsels  that  they  roll  under  their  tongues  ; 

^  A.  Ita  jocaris,  quasi  ego  dicam,  eos  esse  miseros,  qui  nati  non  sunt,  et  non  eos 
niiscros,  qui  mortui  sunt.  M.  Esse  ergo  eos  dicis.  A.  Immo,  quia  non  sunt,  cum 
fuerint,  eos  miseros  esse  M.  Pugnantia  te  loqui  non  vides  1  quid  enim  tam  pug- 
nat,  quara  non  modo  niiserum,  sed  omnino  quidquam  esse,  qui  non  fit.  A.  Quoniam 
nie  verbo  premis,  posthac  non  ita  dicam,  miseros  esse,  sed  lantum,  miseros,  ob  id 
ipsuni  quia  non  sunt.  M.  Non  dicis  igitur,  miser  est.  M.  Crassus,  sed  miser  Crassus. 
A.  Ua  plane.  M.  Quasi  non  necesse  sit,  qiiicquid  isto  modo  pronunfies,  id  aut  esse, 
aut  non  esse,  antu  dialccticis  neimbutusquidemes,  &c.  Ciccr.  Tuscul.  Quest.  Lib.  1. 


CONCLUSION.  239 

and  is  an  adamantine  chain  to  coerce  and  restrain  them, 
when  they  break  all  other  cords,  and  cast  all  other  bonds 
behind  them?  yea,  hath  not  this  been  from  the  creation  of 
the  world*^  the  great  engine  of  the  providence  of  God  for  the 
preserving  of  mankind  from  the  outrageousness  and  unmea- 
surableness  of  iniquity  and  wickedness,  which  would  utterly 
ruin  all  human  society,  and  work  a  degeneracy  in  mankind 
into  a  very  near  approximation  unto  the  beasts  that  perish  ; 
namely,  by  keeping  alive  in  the  generality  of  rational  crea- 
tures, a  prevailing  conviction  of  an  abiding  condition  of  evil 
doers  in  a  state  of  misery  ?  To  undeceive  the  wretched 
world,  and  to  set  sinful  man  at  liberty  from  this  bondage 
and  thraldom,  to  his  own  causeless  fears,  Mr.  B.  comes  forth 
and  assures  them  all  that  the  eternity  of  torments  is  a  fable, 
and  everlasting  punishment,  a  lie  ;  let  them  trouble  them- 
selves no  more,  the  worst  of  their  misery  may  be  past  in  a 
moment ;  it  is  but  annihilation,  or  rather  perdition  of  soul 
and  body,  and  they  are  for  ever  freed  from  the  wrath  of  the 
Almighty.  Will  they  not  say,  *  Let  us  eat  and  drink  for  to- 
morrow we  shall  die?'  Down  we  lie  of  a  season.  God,  it 
seems,  will  see  us  once  again  and  then  farewell  for  ever. 
Whether  ever  there  were  a  more  compendious  way  of  serving 
the  design  of  Satan,  or  a  more  expedient  engine  to  cast 
down  and  demolish  the  banks  and  bounds  given  to  the  bot- 
tomless lust  and  corruption  of  natural  men,  that  they  may 
overflow  the  world  with  a  deluge  of  sin  and  confusion,  con- 
sidering the  depraved  condition  of  all  men  by  nature,  and 
the  rebellion  of  the  most  against  the  love  and  mercy  of 
the  gospel,  I  much  doubt.  But  who  is  more  fit  to  encou- 
rage wicked  men  to  sin  and  disobedience,  than  he  who  la- 
bours also  to  pervert  the  righteous  and  obedient  from  their 
faith? 


To  close  this  whole  discourse,  I  shall  present  Mr.  Bid- 
die's  catechumens  with  a  shorter  catechism  than  either  of 
his,  collected  out  of  their  master's  questions,  with  some  few 

'  Hac  Caesar  disseruit,  credo  falsa  existimans  ea  qua  de  infernis  memorantur  di- 
verse itinere  nialos  a  bonis  loca  tetra,  inculta,  foeda  atque  formidolosa  habere.  Cato 
apud  Salust.  Bell.  Catilin. 


240  CONCLUSION. 

inferences,  naturally  flowing  from  them  ;  and  it  is   as  fol- 
lows. 

*Q.  1.  What  is  God? 

*  A.  God  is  a  Spirit,  that  hath  a  body,  shape,  eyes,  ears, 
hands,  feet,  like  to  us. 

'  Q.  2.  Where  is  this  God  ? 

'A.  In  a  certain  place  in  heaven,  upon  a  throne,  where 
a  man  may  see  from  his  right  hand  to  his  left. 
'  Q.  3.  Doth  he  ever  move  out  of  that  place  ? 

*  A.  I  cannot  tell  what  he  doth  ordinarily,  but  he  hath 
formerly  come  down  sometimes  upon  the  earth. 

'Q.  4.  What  doth  he  do  there  in  that  place? 

*A.  Among  other  things,  he  conjectures  at  what  men 
will  do  here  below. 

'  Q.  5.  Doth  he  then  not  know  what  we  do? 

'  A.  He  doth  what  we  have  done,  but  not  what  we  will 
do. 

*  Q.  6.  What  frame  is  he  in,  upon  his  knowledge  and 
conjecture? 

*A.  Sometimes  he  is  afraid,  sometimes  grieved,  some- 
times joyful,  and  sometimes  troubled. 

'  Q.  7.  What  peace  and  comfort  can  I  have  in  committing 
myself  to  his  providence,  if  he  knows  not  what  will  befall  me 
to-morrow  ? 

*  A.  What  is  that  to  me,  see  you  to  that. 
'  Q.  8.  Is  Jesus  Christ  God  ? 

*  A.  He  is  dignified  with  the  title  of  God,  but  he  is  not 
God. 

*Q.  9.  Why  then  was  he  called  the  only  begotten  Son  of 
God? 

'  A.  Because  he  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

'  Q.  10.  Was  he  Christ  the  Lord  then  when  he  was  born? 

*  A.  No,  he  became  the  Lord  afterward. 

*Q.  11.  Hath  he  still  in  heaven  a  human  body? 

*A.  No,  but  he  is  made  a  Spirit,  so  that  being  not  God 
but  man,  he  was  made  a  God  ;  and  being  made  a  God,  he  is 
a  Spirit,  and  not  a  man. 

'Q.  12.  What  is  the  Holy  Ghost  ? 

*A.  A  principal  angel. 

*  Q.  13.  Did  death  enter  by  sin,  or  was  mortality  actually 
caused  by  sin  ? 


CONCLUSION.  241 

'A.  No. 

'  Q.  14.  Why  is  Christ  called  a  Saviour  ? 

*  A.  Because  at  the  resurrection  he  shall  change  our  vile 
bodies. 

*  Q.  15.  On  what  other  account  ? 
'A.  None  that  I  know  of. 

*  Q.  16.  How  then  shall  I  be  saved  from  sin  and  wrath  ? 

*  A.  Keep  the  commandments,  that  thou  raayest  have  a 
right  to  eternal  life. 

'Q.  17.  Was  Christ  the  eternal  Son  of  God  in  his  bosom, 
revealing  his  mind  from  thence,  or  was  he  taken  up  into 
heaven,  and  there  taught  the  truths  of  God  as  Mahomet  pre- 
tended? 

'  A.  He  ascended  into  heaven,  and  talked  with'God,  be- 
fore he  came  and  shewed  himself  to  the  world. 

'  Q.  18.  What  did  Christ  do  as  a  prophet  ? 

'  A.  He  gave  a  new  law. 

'Q.  19.  Wherein? 

*  A.  He  corrected  the  law  of  Moses. 

'  Q.  20,  Who  was  it  that  said  of  old,  '  Thou  shall  love 
thy  neighbour  and  hate  thine  enemy  ? 

*  A.  God  in  the  law  of  Moses,  which  Christ  corrects. 

'  Q.  21.  Is  Christ  to  be  worshipped  because  he  is  God? 

*  A.  No,  but  because  he  redeemed  us. 

*  Q.  22.  May  one  that  is  a  mere  creature  be  worshipped 
with  divine  or  religious  worship  ? 

'A.  Yes. 

*Q.  23.  How  can  Christ  being  a  mere  man,  and  now  so  far 
removed  from  the  earth,  understand  and  hear  all  the  prayers 
and  desires  of  the  hearts  of  men,  that  are  put  up  to  him  all 
the  world  over  ? 

*  A.  I  cannot  tell,  for  God  himself  doth  not  know  that 
there  are  such  actions,  as  our  free  actions  are,  but  upon  in- 
quiry. 

*Q.  24.  Did  Christ  give  himself  for  an  offering  and  sacri- 
fice to  God  in  his  death  ? 

*  A.  No,  for  he  was  not  then  a  priest. 

'  Q.  25.  Did  Christ  by  his  death  make  reconciliation  for 
our  sins,  the  sins  of  his  people,  bear  their  iniquities  that 
they  might  have  peace  with  God  ? 


242  CONCLUSION. 

'  A.  No,  but  only  died  that  they  might  turn  themselves 
to  God. 

'  Q.  26.  Did  he  so  undergo  the  curse  of  the  law  and  was 
so  made  sin  for  us;  were  our  iniquities  so  laid  on  him,  that 
he  made  satisfaction  to  God  for  our  sins  ? 

'  A.  No,  there  is  no  such  thing  in  the  Scripture. 

'  Q.  27.  Did  he  merit  or  procure  eternal  life  for  us  by  his 
obedience  and  suffering? 

'A.  No,  this  is  a  fiction  of  the  generality  of  Christians. 

'  Q.  28.  Did  he  redeem  us  properly  with  the  price  of  his 
blood,  that  we  should  be  saved  from  wrath,  death,  and 
hell? 

*  A.  No,  there  is  no  such  use  or  fruit  of  his  death  and 
blood-sheddino;. 

'  Q.  29.  If  he  neither  suffered  in  our  stead,  nor  underwent 
the  curse  of  the  law  for  us,  nor  satisfied  justice  by  making- 
reconciliation  for  our  sins,  nor  redeemed  us  by  the  price  of 
his  blood,  what  did  he  do  for  us  ;  on  what  account  is  he  our 
Saviour  ? 

'  A.  He  taught  us  the  way  to  heaven,  and  died  to  leave 
us  an  example. 

'  Q.  30.  How  then  did  he  save  them,  or  was  he  their  Sa- 
viour, who  died  before  his  teaching  and  dying  ? 

'  A.  He  did  not  save  them,  nor  was  their  Saviour,  nor  did 
they  ask  any  thing  in  his  name,  or  received  any  thing  on 
his  account. 

*  Q.  31.  Did  Christ  raise  himself  according  as  he  spake 
of  the  temple  of  his  body,  destroy  this  temple  and  the  third 
day  I  will  raise  it  again? 

'  A.  No,  he  raised  not  himself  at  all. 

'  Q.  32.  Hath  God  from  eternity  loved  some  even  before 
they  did  any  good,  and  elected  them  to  life  and  salvation  to 
be  obtained  by  Jesus  Christ? 

'  A.  No,  but  he  loved  all  alike. 

'Q.  33.  Did  God  in  the  sending  of  Christ  aim  at  the  sal- 
vation of  a  certain  number  of  his  elect  ? 

'  A.  No,  but  at  the  salvation  of  men  in  general  whether 
ever  any  be  saved  or  no. 

'  Q.  34.  Are  all  those  saved  for  whom  Christ  died  ? 

*  A.  The  least  part  of  them  are  saved. 


CONCLUSION.  243 

*  Q.  35.  Is  faith  wrought  in  us  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  or 
are  we  converted  by  the  eflacacy  of  his  grace  ? 

'A.  No,  but  of  ourselves  we  believe  and  are  converted, 
and  then  we  are  made  partakers  of  the  Spirit  and  his  grace. 

'  Q.  36.  Are  all  true  believers  preserved  by  the  power  of 
God  unto  salvation  ? 

*  A.  No,  many  of  them  fall  away  and  perish. 

'  Q.  37.  Is  the  righteousness  of  Christ  imputed  to  us  for 
our  justification? 

'  A.  No,  but  our  own  faith  and  works. 

*  Q.  38.  Are  we  to  receive  or  apprehend  Christ  and  his 
righteousness  by  faith,  that  we  may  be  justified  through  him? 

'  A.  No,  but  believe  on  him  that  raised  him  from  the 
dead,  and  without  that,  it  suffices. 

'  Q.  39.  Are  we  able  to  keep  all  God's  coilimandments  ? 
'  A.  Yes. 

*  Q.  40.  Perhaps  in  our  sincere  endeavours ;  but  can  we 
do  it  absolutely  and  perfectly  ? 

*  A.  Yes,  we  can  keep  them  perfectly. 

'  Q.  41.  What  need  a  man  then  to  apprehend  Christ's  righ- 
teousness and  apply  it  to  himself  by  faith? 

'A.  None  at  all,  for  there  is  no  such  thing  required. 

'  Q.  42.  What  shall  become  of  wicked  men  after  the  re- 
rection  ? 

'  A.  They  shall  be  so  consumed  body  and  soul,  as  not  at 
all  to  remain  in  torments.' 


OF 

THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST, 

AND 

OF  JUSTIFICATION : 


DOCTRINE  CONCERNING    THEM  FORMERLY  DELIVERED  VINDICATED  FROM 
THE  ANIMADVERSIONS  OF  MASTER  R.  B. 


Of  this  task  I  would  complain  if  I  durst ;  but  I  know  not 
how  it  may   be  taken  ;  and  whether  it  may  not  occasion 
another  apology.     So  are  writings  of  this  nature,  as  waves 
that  thrust  on  one  another.  *  Books,  'says  one,  *  are  like  good 
turns ;  they  must  be  new  covered,  or  it  will  rain  through.' 
I  was  in  some  hope  to  have  escaped   this  trouble.     But 
^irovog  TTovo)  ttovov   <^igH.     And  Chrysostom  tells  us,  that 
^  TToXXijc   "yifiu    raga'^^r^i;   y]    ^wr},    koi  Oopvftiov  fiiarog  6  irapdv 
^log  IcTTiv.     I   desire  to  be  content  with  my  portion,  being 
better  yet  than  that  of  *^Livius  Drusius,  who  complained 
*  uni  sibi  nee  puero  quidem  unquam  ferias  contigisse  ;'  so  it 
be  in  and  about  things  of  real  use,  and  advantage  to  the 
souls  of  men,  I  can  be  content  with  any  pains  that  I  have 
strength  to  answer.     But  this  is  an  evil,  which  every  one 
who  is  not  stark  blind  may  see  in  polemical  writings;  almost 
their  constant  end,  is  \oy oiJ.a-)(la,  TrepiavToXoyia,  dnoXoyia, 
whence  saith  the  apostle,  yiverai  (pOovog,  tpig,  (5\a(7(l)rifxiai, 
vTTovoiai  TTovrjpai,  7rapa8iaTpij3at.     Having  through  the  provi- 
dence of  God  (whether  on  my  part  necessarily  or  wisely  I 
know  not  ^ehg  otSa),  engaged   in  public,  for  the  defence  of 
some   truths  of  the  gospel  (as  I  believej,  I  was  never  so 
foolish,  ;  s  to  expect  an  escape  without  opposition.    He  that 

*  Sophocles.  •»  Chrysosl.  Con.  1.  •crEpi 'rrfovoiac. 

"^  Suetou.  in  vit.  Tib. 


OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST,    &C.  245 

puts  forth  a  book,  sentences  his  reason  to  the  gantelope : 
every  one  will  strive  to  have  a  lash  at  it  in  its  course,  and 
he  must  be  content  to  bear  it.  It  may  be  said  of  books  of 
this  kind,  as  he  said  of  children''  (things  often  compared), 
TO  yivsa^ai  iraTtpa  iraidivv,  AwTrrj,  0oj3oc,  (fipovrlg.  '  Anxiety, 
fear,  and  trouble,  attend  their  authors.'  For  my  own  part, 
as  I  provoked  no  man  causelessly  in  any  of  my  writings,  de- 
fended no  other  doctrine  professedly  but  the  common  faith 
of  the  Protestant  churches,  of  which  I  found  the  saints  of 
God  in  possession,  when  I  came  first  acquainted  with  them ; 
so  1  have  from  the  beginning  resolved,  not  to  persist  in  any 
controversy,  as  to  the  public  debate  of  it,  when  once  it 
begins  to  degenerate  into  a  strife  of  words,  and  personal 
reflections ;  so  much  the  more  grievous  is  it  to  me,  to  en- 
gage in  this  now  in  hand,  of  the  necessity  whereof  I  shall 
give  the  reader  a  brief  account.  That  as  to  the  matter  of 
the  contest  between  Mr.  B.  and  myself,  Mr.  B.  is  my  wit- 
ness, that  I  gave  not  the  occasion  of  it;  so  as  to  the  manner 
of  its  handling,  that  I  carried  not  on  the  provocation,  I  ap- 
peal to  all  that  have  read  my  treatise,  which  is  now  animad- 
verted on.  The  same  person,  '  et  initium  dedit,  et  modum 
abstulit.'  Some  freedom  of  expression,  that  perhaps  I  might 
righteously  have  made  use  of,  to  prevent  future  exacerbations 
I  designedly  forbore.  1  know  that  some  men  must  have 
BvatTiva  pijfjiara.  Expressions^  concerning  them,  had  need  be 
fivpo(5pf:Xiig'  or  like  the  letters,  that  men  print  one  of  ano- 
ther, which  are  oftentimes  answerable  to  that  of  Augustus 
to  Maecenas  ;  '  vale  mel  gemmeum,  medullise  ebur  ex  Hetru- 
ria,  lasera-rietinum,  adamas  supernas,  Tiberinum  margari- 
tum,  cilniorum  smaragde,  jaspis  figulorum,  berille  Porsennae, 
carbunculum  Italiae,'  koi  'Iva  avvTijXM  iravra,  &c.  I  hoped 
therefore  this  business  had  been  at  an  issue  ;  others  also  were 
of  the  same  mind ;  especially  considering  that  he  had  almost 
professed  against  proceeding  farther  in  this  controversy  in 
some  other  treatises  and  apologies.  For  my  own  part,  I 
must  profess  my  thoughts  arose  only  from  his  long  silence. 
The  reason  of  this  1  knew  could  not  be  that  of  him  in  the 
poet, '^^tXa   yap  oKVHv  Trpajfi   aviip  irpaaawv  fxiya'   seeing  he 

^  Menander.  *  Tiiv  KSvoSo^iav  w?  TEXEOTa~isv  ;^iTaiva  h  4'^%''  wsfuxEv  imoTidta-bat. 

^  Sophocles. 


246  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

could  have  done  it  as  speedily  as  have  written  so  much  paper. 
The  expressions  in  his  books  seemed  to  me,  as  the  fermen- 
tation of  a  spirit,  that  at  one  time  or  other  would  boil  over. 
I  confess  I  was  something  delivered  from  the  fear  of  it,  when 
not  long  before  the  publishing  of  his  confession  and  apology, 
I  met  with  him,  and  had  occasion  of  much  conference  with 
him  at  London,  even  about  justification  ;  and  he  made  not 
the  least  mention  of  this  confutation  of  me,  which  he  hath 
now  published ;  but  <j>iWiKo'ig  evei^ev  ofi^amv'  but  though  this 
present  contest  might  have  been  easily  prevented  (as  the 
reader  will  instantly  perceive),  yet  I  presume  the  book  was 
then  wholly  printed,  and  Mr.  B.  was  not  to  lose  his  pains, 
nor  the  world  the  benefit  thereof,  nor  the  printer  his  ink  and 
paper,  for  so  slight  a  cause,  as  the  preventing  of  the  asper- 
sion of  me  for  an  Antinomian. 

But  *  jacta  est  alea,'  now  it  is  out,  we  must  make  the 
best  of  it;  and  I  hope  the  reader  will  excuse  me  in  what 
follows,  wg  ou^'  vTrap')((ii}v  aWa  riintopoviuLEvoQ. 

But  why  must  my  arguments  be  answered,  and  myself 
confuted?  Two  reasons  hereof  are  given.  The  first  by  very 
many  insinuations  ;  namely,  that  I  have  delivered  dangerous 
doctrines,  such  as  subvert  the  foundation  of  the  gospel, 
plain  antinomianism ;  and  these  two  positions  are  laid  down 
to  be  confuted,  viz.  first.  That  the  elect  are  justified  from 
eternity,  or  from  the  death  of  Christ,  before  they  believe. 
Secondly,  That  justification  by  faith,  is  but  in  foro  con- 
scientia,  or  in  our  own  feeling,  and  terminated  in  consci- 
ence, and  not  in  foro  Dei:  farther,  then,  conscience  may  be 
so  called ;  and  my  arguments  for  them  are  answered ; 
chap.  viii.  p.  189.  But  what  should  a  man  do  in  this  case? 
1  have  already  published  to  Mr.  B.  and  all  the  world,  that  I 
believe  neither  of  these  propositions  ;  must  I  take  my  oath 
of  it,  or  get  compurgators,  or  must  we  have  no  end  of  this 
quarrel  ?  Let  Mr.  B.  prove  any  such  thing,  out  of  any  thing 
I  have  written,  and  as  Nonius  says,  out  of  Ngevius,  '  ei  dum 
vivebo,  fidelis  ero.'  I  am  sure  this  minds  me  of  that  pas- 
sage in  the  Jewish  liturgy,  '  placeat  tibi  domine  liberare  me 
a  lite  difficili,  et  ab  adversario  difficili,  sive  is  ad  foedus  tuum 
pertineat,  sive  non  pertineat.'  The  following  examination  of 
the  particulars  excepted  against  by  Mr.  B.  will  make  this 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  247 

evident,  whence  it  will  appear,  thats  jutKjoa  Trpocpaaig  ectti  tow 
Trpa^ai  kokwc"  yea  but. 

Secondly,'^  two  or  three  reverend  brethren  told  him,  that 
to  that  part  which  he  hath  considered,  it  was  necessary  I 
should  be  confuted ;  who  these  reverend  brethren  are  I 
know  not ;  1  presume  they  may  be  of  those  friends  of  Mr. 
B.  that  blame  him  for  replying  to  Mr.  Blake,  but  say  for  all 
the  rest  with  whom  he  hath  dealt  (of  whom  I  am  forced  to 
be  one)  that  it  is  no  matter,  they  deserved  no  better. 
Whoever  they  are,  they  might  have  had  more  mercy  than 
not  a  little  to  pity  poor  men  imder  the  strokes  of  a  heavy 
hand.  Nor  do  I  know  what  are  the  reasons  of  the  brethren, 
why  my  name  must  be  brought  on  this  stage ;  nor  perhaps 
is  it  meet  they  should  be  published.  It  may'  be  it  is  ne- 
cessary that  Mr.  Owen  should  be  confuted  among  Antino- 
mians,  and  that  ek  rp'nro^og.  But  what  if  it  should  appear 
in  the  issue,  that  Mr.  Owen  hath  deserved  better  at  their 
hands,  and  that  this  advice  of  theirs  might  have  been  spared  ? 
But  not  to  complain  of  I  know  not  whom,  to  those  reve- 
rend advisers  I  shall  only  say,  e'/Se  irav  e^ei  KoXwg,  to], 
rraiyvid),  Sote  Kpiorov,  koI  Travreg  vfidg  fura  yapag,  TroTnrvcraTi.' 
but  if  it  appear  in  the  issue,  that  I  was  charged  with  that 
which  I  never  delivered,  nor  wrote,  and  that  my  arguments 
to  one  purpose,  are  answered  in  reference  to  another,  and 
that  this  is  the  sum  of  Mr.  B.'s  discourse  against  me,  1  shall 
only  recommend  to  them  some  verses  of  old  Ennius,  as  I 
find  them  in  Aus.  Pop. 

Nam  qui  lepide  postulat  alterum  frustrari 
Quern  frustatur,  frustra  eurn  dicit  frustra  esse, 
Nam  qui  sese  frustrari  quem  frustra  sentit. 
Qui  frustatur  is  frustra  est,  si  non,  ille  est  frustra. 

What  then  shall  I  do  ?  I  am  imposed  on  to  lay  the  foun- 
dation of  all  antinomianism  (as  Mr.  Burgess  is  also),  to 
maintain  justification  from  eternity,  or  at  least  in  the  cross 
of  Christ,  of  all  that  should  believe;  and  justification  by 
faith  to  be  but  the  sense  of  it  in  our  consciences  (which  last 
I  know  better  and  wiser  men  than  myself  that  do,  though  I 
do  not)  and  so  reckoned  amongst  them  that  overthrow  the 
whole  gospel,  and  place  the  righteousness  of  Christ  in  the 

8  Menander.  ''  Mr,  B.'s  Preface. 


248         OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST, 

room  of  our  own  believing  and  repentance,  rendering  them 
useless. 

Shall  I  undertake  to  confute  Mr.  B.'s  book,  at  least 
wherein  we  differ,  and  so  acquit  myself  both  from  Antino- 
mianism  and  Socinianism  in  the  business  in  hand  ?  But, 
1.  The  things  of  this  discourse  are  such,  and  the  manner  of 
handling  them  of  that  sort,  that  Mr.  B.  heartily  in  the  close 
of  his  book,''  begs  pardon  for  them,  who  have  necessitated 
him  to  spend  so  much  time  to  so  little  purpose;  koL  ravra 
7rpaacru)v  (poaK  avrjp  ovdlv  iroiCov.  As  I  see  not  yet  the  neces- 
sity of  his  pains,  s,o  I  desire  his  reverend  advisers  may  thank 
him  for  this  intercession,  for  1  suppose  myself  (at  least),  not 
concerned  therein.  But  this  I  can  say,  that  I  am  so  far  from 
engaging  into  a  long  operose  contest,  in  a  matter  of  such 
importance  and  consequence,  as  the  subject  of  that  book  is 
represented  to  be,  that  I  would  rather  burn  my  pens  and 
books  also,  than  serve  a  provocation  so  far,  as  to  spend  half 
that  time  therein,  which  the  confutation  of  it  would  require 
from  so  slow  and  dull  a  person  as  myself. 

2.  He  hath  in  his  preface  put  such  terrible  conditions 
upon  those  that  will  answer  him,  that  I  know  no  man  but 
must  needs  be  affrighted  with  the  thoughts  of  the  attempt. 
He  requires,  that  whoever  undertake  this  work,  be  of  a 
stronger  judgment,  and  a  more  discerning  head,  than  he ; 
that  he  be  a  better  proficient  in  these  studies  than  he  ;  that 
he  be  freer  from  prejudice  than  he  ;  that  he  have  more  illu- 
mination and  grace  than  he  :  that  is,  that  he  be  a  better, 
wiser,  more  holy,  and  learned  man,  than  Mr.  B.  Now  if  we 
may  take  Mr.  B.'s  character,  by  what  he  discourseth  of  his 
mortification  and  sincerity,  his  freedom  from  prejudice,  8cc. ; 
as  there  is  no  reason  but  that  we  should  ;  I  profess  1  know 
not  where  to  find  his  match,  much  less  any  to  excel  him, 
with  whom  I  might  intercede  for  his  pains  in  the  consider- 
ation of  this  treatise  j  for  as  for  myself,  I  am  seriously  so  far 
from  entertaining  any  such  thoughts,  in  reference  to  Mr.  B. 
that  I  dare  not  do  it  in  reference  to  any  one  godly  minister 
that  I  know  in  the  world  ;  yea,  1  am  sure  that  I  am  not  in 
respect  of  all  the  qualifications  mentioned,  put  together,  to 
be  preferred  before  any  one  of  them.  If  it  be  said,  that  it 
is  not  requisite  that  a  man  should  know  this  of  himself,  but 

•^  Page  462. 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  249 

only  that  he  be  so  indeed  ;  I  must  needs  profess,  that  being 
told  beforehand  that  such  he  must  be,  if  he  undertake  this 
work,  I  am  notable  to  discern  how  he  should  attempt  it,  and 
not  proclaim  himself,  to  have  an  opinion  of  his  own  qualifi- 
cations, answerable  to  that  which  is  required  of  him. 

3.  It  is  of  some  consideration,  that  a  man  that  doth  not 
know  so  much  of  him  as  I  do,  would  by  his  writings  take 
him  to  be  immitis  and  immisericors  a  very  Achilles,  that 
will  not  pardon  a  man  in  his  grave ;  but  will  take  him  up, 
and  cut  him  in  a  thousand  pieces.  I  verily  believe,  that  if 
a  man  (who  had  nothing  else  to  do),  should  gather  into  one 
heap  all  the  expressions,  which  in  his  late  books,  confes- 
sions, and  apologies,  have  a  lovely  aspect  towards  himself, 
as  to  ability,  diligence,  sincerity,  on  the  one  hand,  with  all 
those  which  are  full  of  reproach  and  contempt  towards 
others,  on  the  other,  the  view  of  them  could  not  but  a  little 
startle  a  man  of  so  great  modesty,  and  of  such  eminency  in 
the  mortification  of  pride  as  Mr.  B.  is.     But, 

'OvdlU  ItD-  avroZ  fu  x.aHa  Fvvcipa, 

Had  I  not  heard  him  profess  how  much  he  valued  the 
peace  of  the  church,  and  declare  what  his  endeavours  for  it 
were,  I  could  not  but  suppose  upon  evidences  which  I  am 
unwilling  to  repeat  together,  that  a  humour  of  disputing 
and  quarrelling,  was  very  predominant  in  the  man  .-'however, 
though  a  profession  may  pass  against  all  evidences  of  fact  to 
the  contrary  whatever ;  yet  I  dare  say  that  he  lives  not  at 
aTTQayoTToXig. 

That  he  hath  been  able  to  discern  the  positions  he  opposes 
in  the  beginning  of  his  eighth  chapter  to  be  contained  in  any 
writings  of  mine,  as  maixitained  by  me,  I  must  impute  to 
such  a  sharp  sightedness,  as  was  that  of  Caius  Caligula;  to 
whom,  when  he  inquired  of  Viteilius  whether  he  saw  him  not 
embracing  the  moon,  it  was  replied,  ''  solis  (domine)  vobis 
diis  licet  invicem  videre.' 

What  shall  I  then  do  ?  Shall  I  put  forth  a  creed,  or  an 
apology,  to  make  it  appear  that  indeed  I  am  not  concerned 
in  any  of  Mr.  Baxter's  contests  ?  But, 

1.  I  dare  not  look  upon  myself  of  any  such  consideration 
to  the  world,  as  to  write  books  to  give  them  an  account  of 

'  Dio. 
VOL.  IX.  S 


250         OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST, 

myself  (with  whom  they  very  little  trouble  their  thoughts)  ; 
to  tell  them  my  faith  and  belief,  to  acquaint  them  when  I  am 
well  and  when  I  am  sick,  what  sin  I  have  mortified  most, 
what  books  I  have  read,  how  I  have  studied,  how  I  go,  and 
walk,  and  look,  what  one  of  my  neighbours  says  of  me,  and 
what  another,  how  I  am  praised  by  some  and  dispraised  by 
others,  what  I  do  and  what  I  would  have  others  do,  what 
diligence,  impartiality,  uprightness,  I -use,  what  I  think  of 
other  men  :  so  dealing  unmercifully  with  perishing  paper, 
and  making  books  by  relating  to  myself,  v^orthy, 

Deferri  in  vicum  vendentem  thus,  et  odores, 
Et  piper,  etquicquid  chartls  amicitur  ineptis.'" 

And  I  should  plainly  shew  myself  aXaZovo)(^avvo(j)\vapoC' 

2.  I  know  there  is  no  need  of  any  such  thing  ;  for  all  that 
know  me,  or  care  to  know  me,  know  full  well,  that  in  and 
about  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  I  have  no  sin- 
gular opinion  of  my  own,  but  embrace  the  common  known 
doctrine  of  the  reformed  churches,  which  by  God's  good  as- 
sistance in  due  time,  I  shall  farther  explicate  and  vindicate 
from  Papists,  Socinians,  and  Arminians  ;  I  cannot  complain, 
that  "^eyu)  tifii  fxovog  rwv  rinCov  l/xoe.  I  have  companions  and 
counsellors.  And  in  truth  it  is  very  marvellous  to  some, 
that  this  learned  person,  who  hath  manifested  so  great  a  ten- 
derness on  his  own  behalf,  as  to  call  their  books  monsters, 
and  themselves  liars,  who  charged  his  opinion  about  justifi- 
cation with  a  coincidence  with  that  of  the  Papists,  should 
himself  so  freely  impute  antinomianismto  others;  an  opinion 
which  he  esteems  as  bad,  if  not  every  way  worse  than  that 
of  the  Papists  about  justification  ;  but  '  contenti  simus  hoc 
Catone  ;'  which  is  all  I  shall  say,  though  some  would  add  ; 

Homine  iniperito  nunquam  quidquam  injustius 
Qui  nisi  quod  ipse  facit  nihil  rectum  putat. 

3.  I  must  add,  if  for  a  defensative  of  myself,  I  should 
here  transcribe  and  subscribe  some  creed  already  published, 
I  must  profess,  it  must  not  be  that  of  Mr.  B.  (p.  12,  13.) 
which  he  calls  the  Worcestershire  profession  of  faith  ;  and 
that  as  for  other  reasons,  so  especially  for  the  way  of  deli- 
vering the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  which  but  in  one  expres- 
sion at  most  differs  from  the  known  confession  of  the  Soci- 
nians :  and  in  sundry  particulars,  gives  so  great  a  counte- 

"  Hor.  Epis.  ii.  1.  269.  "  Apollidorus. 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  251 

nance  to  their  abominations.  For  instance,  the  first  article 
of  it  is,  '  I  believe  that  there  is  one  only  God,  the  Father, 
infinite  in  being,'  &c.  which  being  carried  on  towards  the  end, 
and  joined  to  the  profession  of  consent,  as  it  is  called,  in 
these  words,  *  I  do  heartily  take  this  one  God,  for  my  only 
God  and  chiefest  good,  and  this  Jesus  Christ  for  my  only 
Lord,  Redeemer,  and  Saviour  ;'  evidently  distinguishes  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  our  Redeemer,  as  our  Lord,  from  that  one 
true  God ;  which  not  only  directly  answers  that  question  of 
Mr.  Biddle's,  '  How  many  Lords  of  Christians  are  there  in 
distinction  from  this  one  God  V  but  in  terms  falls  in  with 
that  which  the  Socinians  profess  to  be  the  'tessera'  of  their 
sect  and  churches,  as  they  call  them,  which  is,  that  they  be- 
lieve in  the  '  one  true  living  God  the  Father,  and  in  his 
only  Son  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.'  Nor  am  I  at  so  great  an 
indifferency  in  the  business  of  the  procession  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  as  to  those  expressions  of 'from,'  and  'by  the  Son,'  as 
that  confession  is  at ;  knowing  that  there  is  much  more  de- 
pends on  these  expressions  as  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity, 
than  all  the  confessionists  can  readily  apprehend.  But  yet 
here,  that  we  may  not  have  occasion  to  say,  AeTrroXoywi/ 
diroXoyiwv  (ptv  TrXri^og !  I  do  freely  clear  the  subscribers  of 
that  confession  from  any  sinister  opinion  of  the  Trinity,  or 
the  Deity  of  Jesus  Christ,  though  as  to  myself  I  suppose 
my  reasons  abundantly  sufficient  to  detain  me  from  a  sub- 
scription of  it.  But  if  this  course  be  not  to  be  insisted  on, 
shall  I, 

3.  Run  over  all  the  confessions  of  faith,  and  common 
places  which  I  have,  or  may  have  here  at  Oxford,  and  ma- 
nifest my  consent  with  them  in  the  matter  under  question? 
I  confess  this  were  a  pretty  easy  way  to  make  up  a  great 
book;  but  for  many  reasons  it  suits  not  with  my  judgment, 
although  I  could  have  the  advantage  of  giving  what  they 
positively  deliver  in  abundance  as  their  main  thesis  and 
foundation,  without  cutting  off  discourses  from  their  con- 
nexion and  coherence,  to  give  them  a  new  face  and  appear- 
ance, which  in  their  own  proper  place  they  had  not,  or  to 
gather  up  their  concessions  to  the  adversaries  to  one  pur- 
pose, and  applying  them  to  another:  and  therefore  I  shall 
wholly  wave  that  way  of  procedure,  although  I  might  by  it, 
perhaps,  keep  up  some  good  reputation  with  the  orthodox. 

s  2 


262  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

To  have  passed  Over  then  this  whole  business  in  silence, 
would  have  seemed  to  me  much  the  best  course,  had  I  not 
seen  a  man  of  so  great  integrity  and  impartiality,  as  Mr.  B. 
(who  so  much  complains  of  want  of  candour  and  truth  in 
others)  counting  it  so  necessary  to  vindicate  himself  from 
imputations,  as  to  multiply  books  and  apologies  to  that  end 
and  purpose,  and  that  under  the  chains  of  very  strong  im- 
portunities and  entreaties,  to  turn  the  course  of  his  studies 
and  pains  to  things  more  useful;  wherein  his  labours  (as  he 
says),  have  met  with  excessive  estimation  and  praises.  And 
may  doubtless  well  do  so,  there  being  (as  he  informs  us)  'too 
few  divines  that  are  diligently  and  impartially  studious  of 
truth ;  and  fewer  that  have  strong  judgments,  that  are  able 
to  discern  it,  though  they  do  study  it,' (Pref.)  which,  though 
Mr.  B.  arrogates  not  to  himself,  yet  others  may  do  well  to 
ascribe  to  him.  I  hope  then  he  will  not  be  offended,  if  in 
this  I  follow  his  steps,  though  *  baud  passibus  sequis  :'  and 
'  longo  post  intervallo.'  Only  in  this  I  shall  desire  to  be 
excused,  if  seeing  the  things  of  myself  are  very  inconsidera- 
ble, and  whatever  I  can  write  on  that  account  being  like  the 
discourses  of  men  returning  '  e  lacu  furnoque,'  that  I  multi- 
ply not  leaves  to  no  purpose.     I  shall  then  desire, 

1.  To  enter  my  protest,  that  I  do  not  engage  with  Mr. 
B.  upon  the  terms  and  conditions  by  him  prescribed  in  his 
preface  ;  as  though  I  were  wiser,  or  better,  or  more  learned 
than  he ;  being  fully  assured,  that  a  man  more  unlearned 
than  either  of  us,  and  less  studied,  may  reprove  and  con- 
vince us  of  errors  ;  and  that  we  may  deal  so  with  them,  who 
are  much  more  learned  than  us  both. 

2,  To  premise,  that  I  do  not  deliver  my  thoughts  and 
whole  judgment  in  the  business  of  the  justification  of  a  sin- 
ner :  which  to  do,  I  have  designed  another  opportunity,  tl 
^£og  ^eXei,  Koi  Krfrru),  and  shall  not  now  prevent  myself. 

These  things  being  premised,  I  shall, 

1.  Set  down  what  I  have  delivered  concerning  the  three 
heads,  wherein  it  is  pretended  the  difference  lies  between  us. 

2.  Pass  through  the  consideration  of  the  particular 
places,  where  Mr.  B.  is  pleased  to  take  notice  of  me  and  my 
judgment  and  arguments,  as  to  the  things  of  the  contests, 
wherein  he  is  engaged :  and  this  course  I  am  necessitated 
unto;  because  as  Mr.  B.  states  the  controversies  he  pur- 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  253 

sues  in  the  beginning  of  the  eighth  chapter,  I  profess  my- 
self wholly  unconcerned  in  them. 

The  things  then  that  I  am  traduced  for  the  maintaining 
and  giving  countenance  unto,  are, 

1.  The  justification  of  the  elect  from  eternity. 

2.  Their  justification  at  the  death  of  Christ,  as  dying  and 
suffering  with  him. 

3.  Their  absolution  in  heaven  before  their  believing. 

4.  That  justification  by  faith,  is  nothing  but  a  sense  of 
it  in  the  conscience. 

5.  That  Christ  suffered  the  idem,  which  we  should  have 
done  ;   and  not  only  tantundem.     Of  all  which  very  briefly. 

1.  For  the  first,  I  neither  am,  nor  ever  was  of  that  judg- 
ment ;  though,  as  it  maybe  explained,  I  know  better,  wiser, 
and  more  learned  men  than  myself,  that  have  been,  and  are. 
This  I  once  before  told  Mr.  B.  and  desired  him  to  believe 
me  :  Of  the  death  of  Christ,  p.  33.  [Works,  vol.  v.  p.  599.]  if 
he  will  not  yet  do  it,  I  cannot  help  it. 

2.  As  to  the  second,  I  have  also  entreated  Mr.  B.  to  be- 
lieve that  it  is  not  my  judgment  in  that  very  book  on  which 
he  animadverts;  and  hoped  I  might  have  obtained  credit 
with  him,  he  having  no  evidence  to  the  contrary  :  ht  the 
reader  see  what  I  deliver  to  this  purpose,  pp.  34,  ob.  [pp. 
601,  602.]  In  what  sense  I  maintain  that  the  'elect  died  and 
rose  with  Christ,'  see  pp.  82—84.  [pp.  638—640.] 

3.  The  third,  or  absolution  in  heaven  before  believfng. 
What  I  mean  hereby  I  explain,  pp.  77 — 79.  [pp.  634,  635.] 
Let  it  be  consulted. 

It  was,  on  I  know  not  what  grounds,  before  by  Mr.  B. 
imposed  on  me,  that  I  maintained  justification  upon  the 
death  of  Christ  before  believing  :  which  I  did  with  some 
earnestness  reject,  and  proved  by  sundry  arguments,  that 
we  are  not  changed  in  our  state  and  condition  before  we  do 
believe.  Certainly  never  was  man  more  violently  pressed  to 
a.  warfare,  than  I  to  this  contest. 

4.  That  justification  by  faith  is  nothing  but  a  sense  of  it 
in  conscience,  I  never  said,  I  never  wrote,  I  never  endea- 
voured to  prove.  What  may  a  man  expect  from  others  who 
is  so  dealt  withal  by  a  man  whose  writings  so  praise  him, 
as  Mr.  B.'s  do  ? 

5.  For  the  last  thing,  what  I  affirm  in  it,  what  I  believe 


254  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

in  it,  what  I  have  proved,  the  preceding  treatise  will  give  an 
account  to  the  reader.  And  for  my  judgment  in  these  things, 
this  little  at  present  may  suffice.  Mr.  B.'s  animadversions, 
in  the  order  wherein  they  lie,  shall  nextly  be  considered. 

The  first  express  mention  that  I  am  honoured  withal  is 
towards  the  end  of  his  preface,  occasioned  only  by  a  passage 
in  my  brief  proem  to  Mr.  Eyres's  book  of  justification.  My 
words  as  by  him  transcribed  are  :  '  For  the  present  I  shall 
only  say,  that  there  being  too  great  evidence  of  a  very  wel- 
come entertainment  and  acceptation,  given  by  many  to  an 
almost  pure  Socinian  justification,  and  exposition  of  the  co- 
venant of  grace,' &c.  To  which  Mr.  B.  subjoins  :  'But  to  be 
almost  an  error,  is  to  be  a  truth.  There  is  but  a  thread  be- 
tween truth  and  error,  and  that  which  is  not  near  to  that 
error,  is  not  truth,  but  is  liker  to  be  another  error,  in  the 
other  extreme.  For  truth  is  one  straight  line,  error  is  mani- 
fold, even  all  that  swerves  from  that  line  in  what  space  or 
degree  soever.' 

'Malum  omen!'  and  the  worse  because  of  choice;  whether 
this  proceed  "  nraga  rrjv  row  l\iy)(Ov  ayvoiav,  or  whether  it  be 
TO  Ik  arifxdov  (dcrvWojKTTOv  yap  kuX  tovto)  it  matters  not ;  but 
lam  sure  it  is  sophistical.     The  doctrine  of  justification, 
which  I  reflected  on ;  I  did  not  say  was  near  to  error,  or  al- 
most an  error,  but  near  to  Socinianism  or  almost  Socinian  : 
if  Mr.  B.  takes  error  and  Socinianism  to  be  terms  convert- 
ible, I  must  crave  liberty  to  dissent.     That  which  is  almost 
error,  is  true  :  but  that  which  is  almost  Socinianism  may  be 
quite  an  error,  though  not  an  error  quite  so  bad,  as  that  of 
the  Socinians  concerning  the  same  matter.     He  that  shall 
deny  the   imputation  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  and 
maintain  that  our  performance  of  new  obedience  is  the  mat- 
ter of  our  justification  before  God,  according  to  the  tenor 
of  the  new  covenant,  and  yet  grant  the  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
and  assign  it  a  place  (some  or  other)  in  the  business  of  our 
justification,  his  doctrine  is  but  almost  Socinian,  and  yet  in 
my  judgment  is  altogether  an  error.     And  so  the  heat  of  this 
first  conflict  is  allayed,  'Pulveris  exigui  jactu:'  its  founda- 
tion having  been  only  a/iiiTpia  av^oXKrig. 

But  notwithstanding  this  seeming  discharge,  perhaps  it 
maybe  said, that  indeed  this  was  not  a  honest  insinuation; 

"  Arist  llhet.  lib.  2.  cap.  26. 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  255 

there  being  no  such  doctrines  abroad  amongst  us,  as  hold 
any  blamable  correspondency  with  the  Socinian  doctrine 
of  justification;  and  it  is  not  an  ingenuous  and  candid  way 
of  proceeding,  to  seek  to  oppress  truths,  or  at  least  opinions, 
that  are  managed  with  a  fair  and  learned  plea,  with  names 
of  public  abomination,  with  which  indeed  they  have  no 
communion.  I  confess  this  is  an  unworthy  course,  a  path 
wherein  I  am  not  desirous  to  walk  :  I  shall  therefore,  from 
their  own  writings,  give  the  reader  a  brief  summary  in  some 
few  propositions,  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Socinians  concern- 
ing justification,  and  then  nakedly  without  deprecating  his 
censure,  leave  him  to  judge  of  the  necessity  and  candour  of 
my  forementioned  expressions.     They  say  then,  that, 

1.  Justifying  faith,  or  that  faith  whereby  we  arejustified, 
is  our  receiving  of  Christ,  as  our  Lord  and  Saviour,  trusting 
in  him,  and  yielding  obedience  to  him. 

'  Credere  in  Jesum  Christum,  nihil  aliud  est,  quam  Jesu 
Christo  confidere,  et  idcirco  ex  ejus  praescripto  vitam  insti- 
tuere.  Socin.  Justificat.  Synop.  2.  p.  17.  Fides  est  fiducia 
per  Deum  in  Christum,  unde  apparet,  eam  in  Christo  fidem 
duo  comprehendere  :  unum,  ut  non  solum  Deo,  verum  et 
Christo  confidamus  :  deinde  ut  Deo  obtemperemus,  &,c.  Ca- 
tech.  Racov.  cap.  9.  defideVolkel.  de  vera  Religione,  lib.  4. 
cap.  3.  p.  179,  180.  Smalc.  refut.  Thes.  Franz,  disput.  4. 
p.  103.  et.  disp.  6.  p.  184.  Credere  in  Christum  nihil  aliud 
est;  quam  illi  confidere,  hoc  est,  ipsi,  sub  spe  promissionum, 
ab  eo  nobis  factarum,  obedire,  &c.  Smalc.  Refut.  Thes.  Franz, 
disp.  7.  p. 209.  Fides  in  Christum,  est,  fiduciam  in  eum  col- 
locare,  et  credere  ilium  esse  omnibus  obtemperantibus  sibi 
aeternse  salutis  causam.  Si  proprie  et  stricte  sumatur  ab 
obedientia  differt.  Sed  per  metonymiam  quandam  synech- 
dochiam,  saepe  tam  late  sumitur,  ut  omnia  pietatis  et  justitise 
opera  comprehendat.  Schlichting.  Comment,  in  cap.  11.  ad 
Heb.  p.  519.  Quid  est  credere  in  nomen  Christi?  Res.  eum 
excipere,  ejus  dictis  fidem  habere,  ei  confidere,  ei  denique 
obtemperare.  Dialog.  Anon,  de  Justifi.  p.  4.  Ex  his  quee 
hactenus  dicta  sunt,  satis  intelligi  potest,  etiamsi  verissi- 
mum  sit,  quemadmodum  scriptura  apertissiine  testatur,  nos 
per  mortem  Christi,  perque  sanguinis  ejusfusionem  servatos 
esse,  nostraque  peccata  deleta  fuisse,  non  tantum  hoc  ipsum 
credere,  esse  eam  fidem    in  Christum,  qua,  ut  Sacrce  li terse 


256  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

docent,justificamur,  id  quod  multi  et  olim  putarunt,  et  hodie 
putant,  adeoque  similiter  credunt :  longe  enim  aliud  est,  istud 
credere,  et  sub  spe  vitse  seternse  ab  ipso  consequendsc,  Christo 
obedire;  quod  necessario  requiri  ad  jutificationem  nostram, 
anteaa  nobis  demonstratum  est.  Fragment,  de  Justifi.  Faust. 
Socin.  Opusc.  p.  115.'  That, 

2.  Faith  in  justifying  is  not  to  be  considered  as  a  hand 
whereby  we  lay  hold  on  the  righteousness  of  another,  or  as 
an  instrument,  as  though  righteousness  were  provided  for 
us,  and  tendered  unto  us,  which  would  overthrow  all  neces- 
sity of  being  righteous  in  ourselves. 

*  Patet  quam  inepte  Meisnerus  fidem  vocet  causam  instru- 
mentalem,  qua  justificationem  (seu  justitiain)  apprehen- 
damus,  seu  recipiamus  ;  patet  denique  quam  falso  (qui  error 
ex  priore  consequitur)  fidem,  qua  virtus  aut  opus  est,  justi- 
ficare  neget.  Quid  magis  perversum,  et  Sacris  literis  adver- 
sum  dici  potuit?  Parum  nobis  fuerat,  omnes  reliquas  virtu- 
tes,  et  pia  opera,  a  comparanda  nobis  salute  excludere,  nisi 
etiam  ipsam  in  Deo  fidem,  virtutum  omnium  matrem  et  re- 
ginam,  de  suo  solio  deturbatam,  tam  fceda  ignominia  notas- 
set  fidem  perverse  prorsus  intelligitis,  non  enim  tanquam 
conditionem  adipiscendse  justificationis  consideratis,  sed 
tanquam  instrumentum  vel  manum,  &c.  Jo.  Schlichting.  dis- 
put.  pro  Faust.  Socin.  ad  Meisner.  p.  129 — 131.  De  eo  quod 
homo  justitiam  accipiat,  nihil  legitur  in  Sacris  Literis,  et  si 
id  explicetur  ex  mente  adversariorum,  ridicula  est  fabula ; 
fides  vero  non  est  accurate  loquendo  causa  instrumentalis, 
sed  causa  sine  qua  non  (efficiens)  justificationis  nostras ;  Smal. 
Refut.  Thes.  Franz,  disp.  4.  p.  103.' 

3.  Nor  yet  doth  faith,  repentance,  or  obedience,  procure 
our  justification,  or  is  the  efficient  or  meritorious  cause 
thereof. 

'  Ut  autem  cavendum  est,  ne  ut  hodie  plerique ;  faciunt, 
vitse  sanctimoniam  atque  innocentiam,  effectum  justifica- 
tionis nostrBB  coram  Deo  esse  dicamus  ;  sic  diligenter  cavere 
debemus,  ne  ipsam  vitse  sanctitatem  atque  innocentiam,  jus- 
tificationem nostram  coram  Deo  esse  credamus,  neve  illam 
nostrse  justificationis  coram  Deo  causam  efficientem,  aut 
impulsivam  esse  affirmemus.  Sed  tantummodo,  &c.  Socin. 
Justifi.  Synop.  2.  p.  14.  Fides  justificationem  non  meretur, 
neque  est  ejus  causa  efficiens  ;  non  ignoramus  fidei  nostrae 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  257 

nequaquam  esse  ea  merita,  quibus  justificatio  qua  sem- 
piterna  continetur  felicitas,  tanquam  merces  debita,  sit  tri- 
buenda.  Hinc  porro  consequitur,  fidem  istam,  quamvis 
obedientiam  et  pietatera  in  se  coraprehendat,  nequaquam 
tamen  per  se,  et  principaliter  efficere,  ut  justificationis  be- 
neficiura  consequamur.  Volkel.  de  vera  Relig.  lib.  4,  cap.  3. 
p.  ISl.Smal.  Refut.  Thes.  Franz,  disput.  4,  5.  7.  obedientia 
nostra  quam  Christo  prsestamus,  nee  efficiens,  nee  meritoria 
causa  est  nostrce  justificationis.  Socin.  Thes.  de  Justif.  p.  17. 
vide  Anonym.  Dialog,  de  Justif.  p.  32.' 

4.  But  the  true  use  of  our  faith  and  repentance,  as  to  our 
justification  before  God,  is,  that  they  are  the  '  causa  sine  qua 
non,'  or  the  condition  whereby  according  to  the  appointment 
of  God,  we  eome  to  be  justified,  and  so  is  imputed  to  us. 

'  Diligenter  cavere  debemus,  ne  vitse  sanetitatem  et  inno- 
centiam,  justificationem  nostram  coram  Deo  esse  credamus, 
neve  illam  nostras  coram  Deo  justificationis  causam  eflici- 
entem,  aut  impulsivani  esse  affirmemus,  sed  tantummodo 
causam  sine  qua  eam  justificationem  nobis  non  contingere 
decrevit  Deus.  Socin.  Synop.  Justif.  2.  p.  14.  Id  a  nobis 
revera  exegit,  ut  in  Christum  credamus,  vitam  emendaremus 
(quam  conditionem  salva  sanctitate  et  majestate  sua  non 
poterat  non  exigere).  Orel,  de  Causis  mort.  Cliristi.  p.  5. 
Interim  tamen  s^i,c  habendum  est,  cum  Deus  non  nisi  illis, 
qui  fidem  virtutemque  pro  sua  virili  parte  colunt,  vitam 
sempiternam  designaverit,  fiduciam  istam  ne  quidem  causam 
meritoriam,  aut  principaliter  efiicientem,  sed  causam  sine 
qua  non  (utloquuntur)  justificationis  nostrse  esse.  Volkel.  de 
vera  Relig.  lib.  4.  cap.  3.  p.  181.  Quod  vero  ad  nos  perti- 
net,  non  aliter  reipsa  justi  coram  Deo  habemur,  et  delieto- 
rum  nostrorum  veniam  ab  ipso  eonsequimur,  quam  si  in  Jes. 
Christ,  credamus.    Socin.  Justif.  Synop.  2.  p.  11. 

*  Itaque  nemo  justificatus  est  coram  Deo,  nisi  prius 
Christo  eonfidat,  eique  obediat.  Quae  obedientia  sunt  ilia 
opera  ex  quibus  nos  justificari  Jacobus  Apostolus  afiirmat. 
Socin.  Thes.  de  Justif.  p.  14.  Sunt  enim  opera  nostra,  id 
est,  ut  dictum  fuit,  obedientia,  quam  Christo  prsestamus, 
licet  nee  efficiens  nee  meritoria,  tamen  causa  (ut  vocant) 
sine  qua  non  justificationis  coram  Deo,  atque  seternae  sa- 
lutis  nostrae,  id  ibid,  imputatur  nobis  a  Deo  id  quod  revera 
in  nobis  est,  non  aliquid  quod  a  nobis  absit,  vel  in  alio  sit, 


258  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

nempe  quod  firmiter  in  animo  decreverimus  nihil  dubitantes 
de  Dei  promissionibus,  neque  considerantes  nostram  infir- 
mitatem  nos  propositum  fidei  certamen  decurrere  velle. 
Anonym.  Dialog,  de  Justifi.  p.  29.  (heec  vero  corrigit  Faus- 
tus  Socin.  Notse  in  Dial.  p.  64.  beatitatem  et  remissionem 
peccatorum  nobis  imputari  asserens).  Certum  est  ex  Sa- 
cris  Uteris  requiri  ad  hoc,  ut  quis  consequatur  apud  Deum 
remissionem  peccatorum,  et  ita  corum  Deo  justificetur,  ut 
de  illo  merito  dici  possit,  quod  pactum  Dei  servet.  Frag- 
ment, de  Justif.  Apparet  Paulum  absolute  intelligere  opera 
quzecunque  tandem  ilia  sunt.  Quod  tamen  non  eam  vim  habet, 
utacausajustificationis  nostra  omnium  qusecunque  opera,  et 
quocunque  modo  considerata,  excludere  velit.  Sed  sensus 
ipsius  est,  nulla  esse  opera  quae  tanti  sint,  ut  propter  ipso- 
rum  meritum  justificari  possimus.  Quando  scilicet  nemo 
est,  qui  perfectissime  et  integerrime  per  totam  vitam,  ea 
opera  faciat,  quse  sub  Vetere  sive  sub  Novo  Testament©  prse- 
scripta  sunt,  id  quod  tamen  omnino  requiritur,  sive  requi- 
retur  ad  hoc,  ut  pro  ipsa  opera  tanquam  ejus  rei  aliquo 
modo  meritoria,  justificatio  contingeret.  Diximus  autem 
aliquo  modo  meritoria,  ut  ab  ipsis  operibus  excludamus, 
non  modo  absolutum  et  maxime  proprium  meritum,  quod 
oritur  ex  ipsa  operum  prgestantia  per  se  considerata.  Sed 
etiam  illud,  quod  minus  proprie  et  respective  meritum  est, 
quod  ex  solo  Dei  promisso  oritur  ac  proficiscitur,  adeo  ut 
nemo  nee  per  illud,  neque  per  hoc  meritum,  suorum  operum 
justificationem,  et  absolutionem  a  peccatis  suis,  adipiscatur, 
&c.  vid.  Plu.  fragm.  de  Justificat.  Faust.  Socin.  p.  110. 
Cum  Paulua  negat  nos  ex  operibus  justificari,  considerat 
opera  tanquam  meritoria,  et  sua  ipsorum  vi  hominem  justifi- 
cantia,  et  consequenter  ejusmodi,  quibus  si  ad  Dei  prsecep- 
tum  examinentur,  nihil  prorsus  desit;  at  Jacobus  operum 
nomine  eam  obedieutiam  intelligit ;  sine  qua  Deus  hominem 
sibi  carum  habere  non  vult ;  seu  mavis  opera  ejusmodi  sine 
quibus  dici  nequeat,  uUa  ratione  hominem  Deo  obedire  :  ex 
hac  collatione  ipsorum  duorum  Pauli  et  Jacobi  locorum,  et 
sententiarum,  manifestum  est,  quemadmodum  ad  justifica- 
tionem nostram  non  requiritur  necessario  perfecta  obedien- 
tia  mandatorum  Dei,  sic  ad  eandem  justificationem  omnino 
requiri,  ut  Dei  mandata  ita  conservaremus,  ut  merito  dici 
possit  nos  Deo  obedientes  esse.  Fragm.  Faust,  p.  221.' 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  259 

5.  That  our  justification  is  our  absolution  from  the  guilt 
of  sin,  and  freedom  from  obnoxiousness  unto  punishment 
for  it,  and  nothing  else.  Our  regeneration  is  the  condition 
of  our  absolution,  and  in  them  both,  in  several  respects  is 
our  righteousness. 

'Justificatio  est  cum  nos  Deus  pro  justis  habet,  quod  ea 
ratione  facit,  cumnobisetpeccataremittit,  et  jus  vitsedonat. 
Catech.  Racov.  cap.  11.  de  Justificat.  Justificatio  nihil 
aliud  est,  quam  peccatorum  remissio.  Schlichting.  contra 
Trinit.  p.  147.  Justificatio  nostra  coram  Deo,  ut  uno  verbo 
dicam,  nihil  aliud  est  quam  a  Deo  pro  justis  haberi  :  hoc 
vero  fit  per  absolutionem  peccatorum.  Socin.  Synop.  Jus- 
tif.  2.  p.  11.  Justificatio  nihil  aliud  est,  quam  pro  justo 
habere,  itemque  peccata  remittere  et  condonare.  Id.  p.  13, 
14.  Queero  primum  quid  sit  Justificatio?  R.  Peccatorum  ab- 
solutio.  Anon,  (ni  fallor  Ostorod)  dial,  de  Justifi.  p.  2. 
Hie  tacite  continetur  ea  sententia,  quam  nos  supra  ab  initio 
attigimus,  etnon  obscure  refutavimus,justificationem,  videl. 
a  justo  faciendo  dici,  et  a  justitia  ac  sanctitate  qua  quis  sit 
prceditus ;  cum  tamen  certissimum  sit,  justificationem  in 
Sacris  Uteris  aliud  nihil  significare,  quam  justum  pronun- 
tiare,  sive  ut  justum  tractare.  Faust.  Socin.  notae  in  Dial, 
de  Justif.  p.  60.  Sed  manifestum  est  Paulum  negare,  non 
modo  ex  operibus  legis,  sed  simpliciter,  ex  operibus  nos 
justificari  ^  itaque'  alia  ratione  omnino  est  hie  nodus  sol- 
vendus,  et  dicendum,  Paulum,  operum  nomine  non  quaelibet 
opera  intelligere,  nee  quolibet  modo  accepto,  sed  quse  sua 
vi  hominem  justum  coram  Deo  reddere  possunt,  cum  negat 
nos  ex  operibus  justificari,  qualis  est  absoluta  et  perpetua 
per  totum  vitse  curriculum  legis  divinse  observatio.  Faust. 
Socin.  notse  in  Dial,  de  Justif.  p.  74. 

'  Formalis  itaque  (ut  ita  ioquar)  justificatio  nostra  coram 
Deo  fuit,  et  semper  erit,  propter  carnis  nostras  infirmitatem, 
remissio  peccatorum  nostrorum,  non  autem  impletio  divinge 
legis,  quod  Paulus  operari  vocat.  Veruntamen  nuUi  re  ipsa 
conceditur  ista  remissio,  nisi  Deo  confisus  fuerit,  seque  ipsi 
regendum  et  gubernandum  tradiderit.  Faust.  Socin.  Epist. 
ad  Virum  Clariss.  de  Fide  et  Operibus.' 

6.  That  the  way  whereby  we  come  to  obtain  this  abso- 
lution is  this  :  Jesus  Christ  the  only  Son  of  God,  being 
sent  by  him  to  reveal  his  love  and  grace  to  lost  sinful  man- 


260  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

kind,  in  that  work  yielding  obedience  unto  God  even  unto 
death,  M^as  for  a  reward  of  that  obedience  exalted,  and  had 
divine  authority  over  them  for  whom  he  died  committed  to 
him,  to  pardon  and  save  them,  which  accordingly  he  doth, 
upon  the  performance  of  the  condition  of  faith  and  obedi- 
ence by  him  prescribed  to  them,  at  once  effecting  a  univer- 
sal conditional  application  of  all :  actually  justifying  every 
individual  upon  the  performance  of  the  condition. 

'  Ipsi  Jesu,  tantam  in  ccelo  et  terra,  tanquam  obedientiae 
scilicet  usque  ad  mortem  crucis  insigne  prsemium,  potesta- 
tem  dedit,  ut  eis,  &c.  Socin.  Synop.  Justific.  1.  p.  4.  Inte- 
rea  tarnen  haudquaquam  negamus,  Christi  mortem,  condi- 
tionem  quandam  fuisse  remissionis  peccatorum  nobis  conce- 
dendsB :  quatenus  conditio  fuit  Christo  imposita,  sine  qua 
potestatem  obtinere  ex  Dei  decreto  non  potuit,  peccata  no- 
bis remittendi,  et  nos  ab  seterno  interitu  vindicandi.  Crel. 
de  Cans.  mort.  Christ,  p.  8.  (Paulus  ea  a  fide  opera  remo- 
vet,  quse  perpetuam  perfectissimamque,  per  omneni  vitoe 
cursum  obedientiam  continent.  Jacobus  ergo  ea  intelligit. 
Volkel  de  vera  Relig.  lib.  4.  cap.  3.  p.  180.  ad  461.)  vide 
plura. 

'  Quia  nos  Christus  ab  ajterna  morte  liberavit,  et  ut  nos 
liberare  posset,  mortuus  est,  jure  dicitur  eum  pro  nobis,  et 
pro  peccatis  nostris  mortuum  esse,  et  sanguinem  ipsius  nos 
emundare  a  peccatis :  neque  enim  nos  dicimus,  Christum  ob 
hoc  vel  solum  vel  principale  obedivisse,  ut  nos  ad  seimitan- 
dum  extimularet,  sed  constantissime  affirmamus,  ilium  ideo 
parti  suo  obedientem,  et  pro  nobis  mortuum  fuisse,  ut  po- 
testatem divinam,  interveniente  morte  sua,  consecutus,  sa- 
lutem  nostram  administrare,  et  tandem  reipsa  perficere  pos- 
set. Smal.  Refut.  Thes.  Fran.  disp.  4.  p.  108.  Quamvis  au- 
tem  certissimum  ac  testatissimum  sit,  Jesum  Christum  Dei 
filium  sanguinem  suura  in  reraissionem  peccatorum  nostro- 
rum  fudisse  :  Tamen  ipsa  mors  Christi  per  se  sine  Resurrec- 
tione,  &c.  Socin.  Thes.  de  Justific.  Thes.  3.  vid.  Fragm.  de 
Justificat.  p.  115.' 

7,  That  as  to  good  works,  and  their  place  in  this  busi- 
ness, Paul  speaks  of  the  perfect  works  of  the  law,  and  legal 
manner  of  justifying,  which  leave  no  place  for  grace  or  par- 
don :  James  of  gospel  works  of  new  obedience,  which  leave 
place  for  both. 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  261 

'  Sola  fides  justificat,  at  non  quatenus  sola,  praesertim  si 
de  plena  et  permanente  justificatione  loquamur,  quatenus 
quibusvis  bonis  operibus  opponitur.  Hoc  est  pardcula  ex- 
ciusiva  sola,  non  qusevis  opera,  sed  opera  de  quibus  Aposto- 
lus loquitur,  opera  legis,  opera  plena,  ob  quae  non  secundum 
gratiam  justificatio  imputatur,  sed  secundum  debitum  tribu- 
itur,  excludit.  Non  excludit  autem  ullo  pacto  opera  ex  fide 
provenientia,  cum  Jacobus  expertissime  doceat,  hominera 
justificari  ex  operibus,  non  ex  fide  tantum  :  Schlichting.  ad 
JVleisner.  disput.  pro  Socin.  pp.  290,  291.  In  iis  locis,  ubi 
Apostolus  fidem  operibus  opponit,  de  operibus  ejusmodi 
agit,  quae  et  perfectam  et  perpetuam  obedientiam  continent, 
qualem  sub  lege  Deus  ab  hominibus  requirebat :  verum 
non  de  iis  operibus,  quse  obedientiam,  quam  Deus  a  nobis 
qui  in  Christum  credidimus,  requirat,  comprehendunt. 
Racov.  Catech.  cap.  9.  de  Fide.  Hinc  jam  demum  intelligo 
non  bona  opera,  quae  Deus  ipse  prseparavit,  sed  legis  opera  a 
justificatione  nostra  excludi.  Anonym.  Dial,  de  Justif.  p.  47/ 

8.  That  the  denial  of  our  faith  and  obedience  to  be  the 
condition  of  our  justification,  or  the  asserting  that  we  are 
justified  by  the  obedience  of  Christ  imputed  to  us,  is  the 
ready  way  to  overthrow  all  obedience,  and  drive  all  holiness 
and  righteousness  out  of  the  world. 

'  Quod  Christus  factus  sit  nobis  a  Deo  justitia.  1  Cor.  i.  3. 
id  minime  eo  sensu  dici,  quasi  loco  nostri  legem  impleverit, 
sic  ut  nobis  deinceps  ipsius  justitia  imputetur,  &c.  Schlich- 
ting. ad  Meisn,  disput.  pro  Socin.  p.  277.  Tertius  error 
est,  Deum  imputare  credentibus  innocentiam  et  justitiam 
Christi.  Non  innocentiam,  non  justitiam  Christi  Deus  im- 
putat  credentibus,  sed  fidem  illorum  illis  imputat  pro  justitia. 
Smal.  refut.  Thes.  Franz,  disput.  4.  p.  104.  alterum  est  extre- 
mum,  quod  vulgo  receptum  est,  non  sine  summaanimarum 
pernicie  ;  videlicet,  ad  justificationem  nostram  nihil  prorsus 
bona  opera  pertinere,  nisi  quatenus  sunt  ipsius  justificationis 
efFecta.     Ubi  qui  ita  sentiunt,  &c.  idem.' 

9.  That  as  the  beginning,  so  the  continuance  of  our  jus- 
tification, depends  on  the  condition  of  our  faith,  repentance, 
and  obedience,  which  are  not  fruits  consequent  of  it;  but 
conditions  antecedent  to  it.  Socin.  Thes,  de  Justificat.  p.  18. 
Fragmenta  de  Justific.  p.  113.  And  therefore  in  the  first  place 
we  are  to  be  solicitous  about  what  is  within  us,  about  our 


262  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

sanctification,  before  our  absolution  or  justification.  Socin. 
Epist.  ad  Ch.MN.  de  Fide  et  Operibus.  'Sic tandem apparet 
vestigationeni  nostram  circa  ea  esse  debere,  quae  in  nobis 
invenientur,  cum  justificati  sumus. — Quocirca  diligenter  pri- 
mum  vestigare  debemus  an  res  istse,  sive  utraque,  sive  una 
tantum,  et  utra  (si  modo  res  diversee  sint)  ad  nos  justifican- 
dos  pertineat,  ac  deinde  quid  sint,  aut  quales  esse  debeant, 
ne  erremus,  nobisque  videamur  iilas  habere,  cum  tamen 
longe  ab  eis  absimus.  Quod  enim  ad  misericordiam  Dei 
attinet,  Christique  personam,  una  cum  iis  omnibus  quae  idem 
Christus  pro  nobis  fecit,  et  facturus  est,  quamvis  hse  sunt 
veree,  et  prsecipuee  causs  justificationis  nostrse,  tamen  aut 
jam  illarum  sumus,  erimusve  participes,  antequam  intra  nos 
certum  aliquid  sit,  et  sic  supervacaneum  est  de  illis  cogitare, 
quatenus  per  ea  justificari  velimus:  aut  illarum,  nee  jam  su- 
mus, nee  futuri  erimus  participes,  nisi  prius  intra  nos  eertura 
aliquid  sit,  et  sic  de  hoe  accurate  quserere  debemus,  id  au- 
tem  nihil  est,  prseter  fidem  et  opera.  Socin.' 

10.  As  to  the  death  of  Christ,  our  sins  were  the  impul- 
sive cause  of  it,  and  it  was  undergone  for  the  forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  occasioned  by  them  only,  and  is  in  some  sense,  the 
condition  of  our  forgiveness. 

'  Causa  impulsiva  externa  sunt  peccata  nostra,  quod  iti- 
dem  aperte  sacrse  literse  doeent,  dura  aiunt,  Christum  prop- 
ter peccata  nostra  percussum,  vulneratum,  et  traditum  esse. 
Crel.  de  Caus.  mort.  Chris,  p.  2.' 

'  Q.  What  w&s  the  procuring  cause  of  Christ's  death? 

'A.  He  was  delivered  for  offences;'  Biddle's  Cat.  chap. 
12.  p.  69.  Though  some  (not  of  them)  say,  that  his  death 
was  rather  occasioned,  than  merited  by  sin ;  as  they  speak 
sometimes.  'Finis  ideo  mortis  Christi,  ut  Sacras  Literae  sat 
aperte  doeent,  est  remissio  peccatorum  nostrorura,  et  vitae 
nostrse  emendatio,  ad  quorum  finem  priorem  vel  solum,  vel 
potissimum,  illi  loquendi  modi  referendi  sunt :  cum  dicitur 
Christum  mortuum  esse  pro  peecatis  nostris,  seu  pro  nobis. 
Crel.  de  Caus.  mort.  Christ,  p.  1.' 

11.  That  absolution  and  pardon  of  sin  are  by  no  means 
the  immediate  effects  of  the  death  of  Christ. 

'  Cum  Sacrse  Scripturse  asserunt  Christum  aut  pro  pee- 
catis nostris,  aut  pro  nobis  esse  mortuum,  aut  sanguinem 
ejus  esse  effusura  in  remissionem  peccatorum,  et  siqua  sint 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  263 

his  similia,  eorum  verborum  ea  vis  non  est,  ut  significent 
omnino  efFectum  ilium,  qui  morti  Christi  in  his  locutionibus 
tribuitur,  proxime  fuisse  ex  ea  consecutos.  Crell.  de  Caus. 
mort.  Christi.  p.  35.' 

And  now  let  the  Christian  reader  judge,  whether  I  had 
any  just  occasion  for  the  expressions  above-mentioned  or 
no;  if  he  be  resolved  that  those  words  had  better  been 
omitted,  I  shall  only  profess  myself  in  a  very  great  readi- 
ness to  pass  by  such  mistakes  in  others,  but  leave  myself  to 
his  censure. 

And  with  this  touch  by  the  way  am  I  (as  far  as  I  have 
observed)  dismissed  to  the  eighth  chapter  ;  where  all  that  I 
am  concerned  in  will  receive  an  equally  speedy  despatch. 

In  the  entrance  of  that  chapter,  Mr.  B.  lays  down  two 
propositions  that  he  rejects,  and  another  that  he  intends  to  . 
prove. 

Those  he  rejects  were  before  mentioned,  and  my  concern- 
ment in  them  spoken  to. 

That  which  he  proposes  unto  confirmation,  is, 
'  The  justification  by  faith,  so  called  in  the  Scripture,  is 
not  the  knowledge  or  feeling  of  justification  before  given,  or 
a  justification  in  and  by  our  own  conscience,  or  terminated 
in  conscience ;  but  is  somewhat  that  goes  before  all  such 
justification  as  this  is,  and  is  indeed  a  justification  before 
God.' 

There  is  but  one  expression  in  all  this  proposition  that 
I  am  concerned  in  ;  which  the  reader  may  easily  discover  to 
be  plucked  into  the  thesis  by  head  and  ears  ;  and  that  is, 
'  terminated  in  conscience.'  What  it  is  I  intend  by  that  ex- 
pression, or  what  inconsistency  it  hath  with  that  Mr.  B. 
asserts  in  pretended  opposition  unto  it,  he  doth  not  explain. 
Now  I  say,  that  in  the  sense,  wherein  I  affirm  that  justifica- 
tion is  terminated  in  conscience,  I  may  yet  also  affirm,  and 
that  suitably  to  the  utmost  intention  of  mine  in  that  ex- 
pression, that  justification  by  faith  is  not  a  knowledge  or 
feeling  of  justification  before  given,  nor  a  justification  in,  or 
by  our  own  consciences ;  but  somewhat  that  goes  before  all 
such  justification  as  this  is,  and  is  a  justification  before 
God.  I  am  then  utterly  unconcerned  in  all  Mr.  B.'s  argu- 
ments ensuing,  but  only  those  that  prove  and  evince  that 
our  justification  before  God  is  not  terminated  in  our  con- 


264         OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST, 

sciences  :  which  when  I  can  find  them  out,  I  will  do  my 
endeavour  to  answer  them,  or  renounce  my  opinion.  I  find, 
indeed,  in  some  of  his  following  conclusions  the  words  men- 
tioned 5  but  I  suppose  he  thought  not  himself  that  they  were 
any  way  influenced  from  his  premises.  I  know  he  will  not 
ask,  what  I  mean  then  '  by  terminated  in  conscience;'  seeing 
it  would  not  be  honourable  for  him  to  have  answered  a  mat- 
ter before  he  understood  it.  But  upon  this  expression  chiefly 
is  it,  that  I  am  enrolled  into  the  troop  of  Antinomians. 


-'o  Je 


opoiv  rovg  vo/xovi 


But  that  is  in  the  matter  of  laws;  these  are  but  words. 
Now  though  I  have  just  cause  to  abstain  from  calling  in  as- 
sociates in  my  judgment,  lest  I  should  bring  them  under 
the  suspicion  of  Antinomianism  ;  though  not  of  the  ruder 
sort,  p.  190.  or  at  least  of  laying  the  foundation  of  antino- 
mianism, which  Mr.  Burgess  after  all  his  pains  against  them, 
is  said  to  do  ;  (Prsef.)  but  the  best  is,  that  he  does  it  super- 
ficially and  without  proof;  (Prsef.)  And  although  I  cannot 
come  up  to  the  judgment  of  the  man,  whom  I  shall  name  ; 
yet,  being  he  is  deservedly  of  good  esteem  in  the  judgment 
of  others,  and  particularly  of  Mr.  B.  for  his  opposition  to 
the  Antinomians,  I  will  for  once  make  use  of  his  authority 
for  my  shield  in  this  business ;  and  see  if  in  this  storm  I  can 
lie  safe  behind  it.  It  is  Mr.  Rutherford,  who  in  his  learned  ex- 
ercitations,  De  gratia.  Exercit.  1.  cap.  2.  Tit.  '  Quomodo  jus- 
tificamur  fide;'  having  treated  of  the  matter  of  justification, 
p.  44.  thus  proceeds  :  '  Dicent  ergo  Arminiani,  nos  hie  jus- 
tificationem  sumere  pro  sensu  et  notitia  justificationis  :  ideo- 
que  homines  fide  justificantur,  idem  valet,  ac  homines  turn 
demum  justificantur,  quando  credunt,  hoc  est,  sentiunt  se 
justificari,  cum  antea  essent  justificati.  Nugse  et  tricse  si- 
culse!  nam  justificari  est  plus  quam  sentire  se  justificari: 
nam  (1.)  est  actus  Dei  absolventis  terminatus  in  conscientia 
hominis,  citati  et  tracti  ad  tribunale  tremendi  judicis;  qui 
actus  ante  hoc  instans  non  terminabatur  in  conscientia,'  &c. 
Now  if  this  man  be  an  Antinomian,  I  am  sure  he  much  mis- 
takes himself;  and  yet  he  says  justification  may  be  termi- 
nated in  conscience,  and  yet  not  be  a  sense  of  an  antece- 
dent justification,  nor  from  eternity. 

But  how  it  may  fare  with  him,  I  cannot  guess;   Mr. 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  265 

Pemble  and  Dr.Twiss  (quanta  nomina),  are  in  the  next  page 
recounted  as  the  assertors  of  the  position  here  opposed  by 
Mr.  B.  and  indeed  as  to  some  part  of  it  they  are ;  but  yet,  if 
I  durst  say  it,  they  were  not  Antinomians :  but  Mr.  B.  knows 
these  things  better  than  I. 

But  what  say  I  to  the  whole  position?  p.  190.  'One  learn- 
ed man  (so  am  1  called,  that  the  sacrifice  may  not  fall  with- 
out some  flowers  on  its  head  ;  which  I  professedly  shake  off, 
and  dare  not  own  my  name  amongst  them  who  are  or  ought 
to  be  so  styled)  saith,  that  absolution  in  heaven,  and  justifi- 
cation differ  as  part  and  whole,  and  that  justification  is  ter- 
minated in  conscience,  and  so  makes  a  longer  work  of  jus- 
tification than  they,  that  say  it  is  simul  and  semel,  or 
than  I,  whom  Mr.  Cr.  blames  for  it;  and  so  that  whole  be- 
gun in  eternal  absolution,  or  from  Christ's  death,  and  ended 
in  conscience,  should  contain  eminent  and  transient  acts 
together,  and  no  small  number  of  our  own,  as  there  de- 
scribed.' 

Aiis.  Though  I  do  not  perfectly  understand  the  coherence 
of  these  words,  yet  the  intendment  of  them  being  more  ob- 
vious (and  being  myself  in  great  haste),  I  shall  not  stay  to 
make  any  farther  inquiry  thereabout. 

What  1  mean  by  absolution  in  heaven,  the  reader  if  he 
please  may  see,  chap.  xii.  pp.  75 — 78.  [pp.633 — 635.)  of  that 
treatise,  whence  Mr.  B.  urges  these  expressions.  It  is  neither 
eternal  absolution,  nor  absolution  from  Christ's  death  (if 
from  denote  a  simulty  of  time,  and  not  a  connexion  in  respect 
of  causality,  in  which  sense  Mr.  B.  will  not  deny  that  absolu- 
tion is  from  Christ's  death),  but  an  absolution  at  the  time  of 
actual  justification,  when  God  gives  Christ  to  us,  and  with 
him  all  things,  that  I  intend. 

That  by  asserting  this  absolution  in  heaven,  and  justifi- 
cation to  differ  as  part  and  whole,  and  justification  to  be  ter- 
minated in  conscience,  I  make  longer  work  of  it,  than  those, 
who  say  it  is  simul  and  semel,  is  said  ;  simul  and  semel,  refer 
unto  time,  I  expressly  affirm,  as  Mr.  B.  knows  (or  ought  to 
have  known),  that  there  is  in  these  things  an  order  of  na- 
ture only.  At  the  same  time  wherein  God  absolves  us  in 
heaven,  the  term  of  the  stipulation  for  our  deliverance  being 
accomplished,  by  reckoning  Christ  to  us,  or  in  making  him 
righteousness  to  us,  he  infuses  a  principle  of  life  into  our 

VOL.    IX.  T 


266  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

souls,  whereby  radically,  and  virtually  the  whole  is  accom- 
plished. 

That  actual  justification  should  contain  permanent  and 
transient  acts  together,  and  that  it  is  so  by  me  described,  is 
affirmed  by  a  failure  of  Mr.  B.'s  memory.  Having  made  this 
entrance  and  progress,  adding  the  judgment  of  some,  whom 
he  calls  most  learned  and  judicious  (as  he  is  '  perspicax  in- 
geniorum  arbiter') ;  he  concludes  his  first  section  in  these 
words  :  '  so  that  howsoever  some  by  plausible  words  would 
put  a  better  face  on  it,  the  sense  of  all  seems  to  be  the  same, 
that  justification  by  faith  is  the  revelation  of  God  in,  and  by 
the  conscience,  that  we  are  formerly  justified  ;  and  so  their 
justification  by  faith,  is  the  same  that  we  commonly  call  the 
assurance  or  knowledge  of  our  justification,  in  some  degrees 
at  least,  I  prove  the  contrary  :'  and  so  falls  he  into  his  ar- 
guments. 

That  this  is  my  sense,  I  profess  I  knew  not  before ;  and 
should  be  sorry  1  should  dwell  so  little  at  home,  that  Mr.  B. 
should  know  me,  and  my  mind,  better  than  I  do  myself.  T 
look  upon  him  as  my  friend  :  and. 

To,  TMV  <ft'Ka:v  Koiv',  ov  fAOVov  ra  x^phfiara, 
Kal  vovq  Se,  xai  <fp(wv>i<r£<»j  Kotvmta, 

But  yet  he  may  possibly  be  mistaken ;  for  the  present  I 
will  make  bold  to  deny  this  to  be  my  sense,  and  refer  the 
reader  for  evidence  to  be  given  to  my  negation,  unto  that 
chapter  of  my  book,  whence  Mr.  B.  gathers  my  sense  and 
meaning.  Let  them  then  that  are  concerned  look  to  his  fol- 
lowing arguments  (especially  those  two  whom  he  affirms  to 
have  more  wit  than  the  rest,  p.  204.)  and  woe  be  to  them, 
if  they  find  as  many  distinct  mediums  as  there  are  figures 
hung  up  as  signs  of  new  arguments.  For  my  own  part,  w^hat- 
ever  my  thoughts  are  to  the  whole  business  pleaded  about,  I 
shall  not  (be  they  as  mean  and  base  as  can  be  imagined), 
cast  them  away  in  such  a  scambling  chase  as  this.  Only 
whereas  p.  205.  speaking  to  somebody  (I  know  not  whom), 
■whom  he  acknowledges  to  have  some  learning  and  wit,  he 
says,  '  that  the  act  of  the  promise,  law,  or  grant,  constituting 
right,  giving  title,  remitting  the  obligation  to  punishment, 
in  itself,  is  totally  distinct  from  the  act  of  declaring  this  to 
ourselves,  which  is  said  to  be  terminated  in  conscience,  and 
is  before  it,  and  may  be  without  it,'  2vc.  I  shall,  if  it  please  him, 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  267 

desire  that  it  may  only  with  a  little  alteration  be  thus  ren- 
dered ;  The  act  of  the  promise  (not  that  I  approve  that  ex- 
pression, but  at  present  it  will  serve  the  turn)  giving  right 
&c.  is  complete  justification  by  faith,  and  is  in  itself  totally 
distinct  from,  and  in  order  of  time  before  any  act  of  God 
justifying  terminated  in  our  consciences,  and  proved  with 
one  clear  testimony  or  argument  speaking  to  the  terms  and 
sense  of  the  proposition,  and  I  shall  confess  myself,  as  to 
what  I  have  as  yet  published  of  my  judgment  about  this  bu- 
siness, to  be  concerned  in  the  discourse;  and  so  passing- 
through  the  pikes  of  fifty-six  arguments,  I  come  to  the  ninth 
chapter,  where  I  am  again  called  to  an  account.  Three  things 
doth  Mr.  B.  propose  to  confirmation  in  this  chapter. 
*1.  That  the  elect  are  not  justified  from  eternity. 
'2.  That  they  are  not  justified  at  Christ's  death. 
*3.  Not  while  they  are  infidels  and  impenitent.' 
Any  man  living  would  wonder  how  I  should  come  to 
stand  in  his  way  in  this  chapter.  But  strong  currents  some- 
times pass  their  bounds  in  their  courses,  and  bear  all  before 
them.     Real,  or  reputed  success  gives  great  thoughts  and 
pretexts  for  any  thing,  al  -yap  guTrpao  ^lai  Setvat  (TvjKpv^pai  koL 
avGKiaaaLToiavTa  ovddr}  (Demost.  Olymp).     In  the  very  trea- 
tise which  Mr.  B.  considers  in  these  imputations,  I  have  ex- 
pressly denied,  (and  in  particular  to  Mr.  B.)  that  I  maintain 
any  one  of  these ;  if  he  should  send  but  his  servant,  and  tell 
me,  that  he  is  not  to  be  found  in  such  an  opinion,  I  would 
believe  him.     But  *  quid  verba  audiat  facta  cum  videat?'  If 
I  do  maintain  them  indeed,  must  I  be  believed  upon  my  de- 
nial? but,  *  en  tabulas!'  let  my  book  traduced  be  consulted. 
I  dispute  as  well  as  I  can  against  justification  from  eternity^ 
and  that  I  cannot  do  it  like  Mr.  B.  is  my  unhappiness,  not 
my  crime  ;  1  hope  every  one  must  not  be  sentenced  to  be  of 
an  opinion  which  he  cannot  confute  so  learnedly,  as  another 
more  learned  man  may.     For  justification  at  the  death  of 
Christ  (though  I  must  assure, the  reader,  that  I  have  other 
thoughts  of  the  great  transaction  of  the  business  of  our  sal- 
vation in  the  person  of  our  representative,  than  are  consistent 
with  Mr.  B.'s  principles,  or   than  1  have  yet  published, 
wherein  I  have  the  consent  of  persons  as  eminently  insighted 
in  the  mystery  of  the  gospel,  as  any  I  know  in  the  world),  I 
directly  affirm,  and  endeavour  to  prove,  that  the  elect  are  not 

T   2 


268  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

then  actually  justified;  but  notwithstanding  what  is  done 
for  them,  until  their  own  actual  believing,  they  are  obnoxious 
to  the  law,  &c.as  at  large  chap,  xii.p.75.  [p.  631.]  ofthattrea 
tise,  which  includes  the  last  particular  also. 

But  we  must  proceed,  '  non  qua  eundum  est  sed  qua 
itur;'  in  the  entrance  of  his  ninth  chapter,  Mr,  B.  attempts 
to  prove,  that  the  elect  are  not  justified  from  eternity,  and 
concludes  his  discourse  :  '  The  words  of  one  that  writes  this 
way  are  these.     Here  two  things  may  be  observed. 

1.  '  What  we  ascribe  to  the  merit  of  Christ,  viz.  the  ac- 
complishment of  the  condition,  which  God  required  to  make 
way,  that  the  obligation  which  he  had  freely  put  upon  him- 
self might  be  in  actual  force  :  and  so  much  I  leave  to  him- 
self to  consider  how  rightly  doth  Mr.B.  assign  to  our  works ; 
Thes.  26. 

'And  all  know,  that  a  condition  as  such,  is  no  cause,  but 
an  antecedent,  or  '  causa  sine  qua  non.'  And  is  not  the 
death  of  Christ  here  fairly  advanced,  and  his  merits  well 
vindicated  ?  My  constant  affirmation  is,  and  still  was,  that 
man's  works  are  not  in  the  least  degree  truly  and  properly 
meritorious,  and  that  they  are  such  mere  conditions  of  our 
salvation  (not  of  our  first  justification),  as  that  they  are  no 
causes  of  any  right  we  have  (no  not  to  a  bit  of  bread,  much 
less)  to  heaven.  Do  not  these  men  well  defend  the  honour 
of  Christ's  merits  then,  if  they  give  no  more  to  them,  than 
I  do  to  man's  works  ?  that  is,  not  to  be  the  meritorious 
cause  so  much  as  of  an  hour's  temporal  mercy  ;  that  is,  to 
be  properly  no  merit  at  all.  It  seems  to  me  therefore  that 
they  do  by  their  doctrine  of  eternal  justification  or  pardon, 
not  only  destroy  justification  by  faith,  but  also  all  the  merits 
of  Christ,  and  leave  nothing  for  them  to  do,  for  the  causing 
of  our  pardon  or  justification  before  God.  Nay,  whether  this 
learned  man  can  make  Christ's  sufferings,  and  obedience,  so 
much  as  a  bare  condition,  let  them  consider  that  read  him 
affirming,  that  conditions  properly  must  be  uncertain,  and 
nothing  is  so  to  God  :  therefore  there  can  be  no  condition 
with  God,  therefore  Christ's  death  could  be  no  more.' 

En  cor  Zenodoti,  en  jecur  Cratetis. 

What  is  most  admirable  in  this  discourse  I  know  not. 
1 .  I  am  suggested  to  maintain  justification  from  eternity: 
I  amone  that  write  that  way  :  I  am  one  that  by  the  doctrine 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  269 

of  justification  from  eternity,  overthrow  justification  by  faith, 
and  the  merits  of  Christ.  What  I  shall  say  more  to  this 
business  I  know  not :  the  comoedian  tells  me  all  that  I  can 
say  is  in  vain. 

Ne  adinittam  culpatu  ego  meo  sum  promus  pectori 

Suspicio  est  in  pectore  alieno  sita. 

Nam  nunc  ego  te  si  surripuisse  suspicer 

Jovi  coronani  de  capite  e  capitolio 

Quod  in  culmine  astat  sumnio  ;  si  non  id  feceris. 

Atque  id  tamen  milii  lubeat  suspicarer, 

Qui  tu  id  proliibere  me  potes  ne  suspicer  ?  Plaut. 

2.  Methinks  it  had  been  equal,  that  Mr.B.  who  requires 
{deivwg)  that  men  judge  not  anything  in  his  aphorisms,  but 
according  as  it  is  interpreted,  in  this  his  confession,  should 
have  interpreted  this  passage  of  mine,  by  the  analogy  of 
what  I  have  written  in  the  same  book  about  the  death  of 
Christ  and  merit  thereof.  He  would  have  found  (and  in  these 
things  doth  my  soul  live)  that  all  the  mercy,  grace,  or  privi- 
leges whatever,  of  what  sort  soever,  that  in  this  life  we 
are  made  partakers  of,  all  the  glory,  honour,  and  immorta- 
lity that  we  are  begotten  anew  to  a  hope  of,  is  by  me  every 
where  ascribed  to  the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  merit  thereof, 
as  the  sole  causa  TrpoKaTapTiKrj  of  them  all.  The  making 
out  of  this  takes  up  the  greatest  part  of  my  writings  and 
preaching.  I  can  truly  say,  that  I  desire  to  know  nothing 
but  Christ,  and  him  crucified.  And  I  shall  labour  to  make 
the  honour,  glory,  exaltation,  and  triumph  of  the  cross  of 
Christ,  the  whole  of  my  aim  and  business  in  this  world. 
May  I  be  convinced  of  speaking,  uttering,  writing,  any  one 
word  to  the  derogation  of  the  honour,  efficacy,  power  of  the 
death  and  merits  of  our  dear  Lord  Jesus,  I  shall  quickly  lay 
my  mouth  in  the  dust,  and  give  myself  to  be  trampled  on  by 
the  feet  of  men,  which  perhaps  on  other  accounts  I  am  only 
meet  for.  It  is  only  that  Christ  may  have  the  pre-eminence 
in  all  things,  that  I  will  voluntarily  contend  with  any  living. 
That  as  a  king,  and  priest,  and  prophet,  he  may  be  only,  and 
all  in  his  church,  is  the  design  of  my  contesting. 

But  is  not  this  expression  to  the  derogation  of  his  me- 
rits ?  1  say  if  it  be,  I  disavow  it,  condemn  it,  reject  it.  If 
the  intendment  of  the  expression  be  not,  that  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  by  the  performance  of  what  was  prescribed  to  him  of 
his  Father,  that  he  might  save  us  to  the  utmost,  according 


270  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

to  the  compact  between  Father  and  Son,  did  merit,  purchase, 
and  procure  for  us  all  the  grace,  mercy,  salvation,  promised 
in  the  new  covenant,  I  desire  here  to  condemn  it.  But  if 
that  be  the  sense  of  it  (as  the  words  immediately  going  be- 
fore, with  the  whole  tenor  of  the  discourse,  do  undeniably 
evince),  I  would  desire  Mr.  B.  a  little  to  reflect  upon  his 
dealings  with  other  men,  upon  their  pretended  mistakes,  in 
representing  him  and  his  judgment  to  the  world.  All  the 
advantage  that  is  given  to  this  harangue  is  from  the  am- 
biguity of  the  word  condition.  It  is  evident  that  I  take  it 
here  in  a  large  sense  for  the  whole  prescription  of  obedience 
unto  the  Lord  Jesus,  whereupon  the  promise  of  all  the  good 
things,  that  are  the  fruits  of  his  death,  is  made  to  him,  which 
being  grounded  in  voluntary  compact,  and  laid  thereby  in 
due  proportion,  gives  rise  to  merit  properly  and  strictly  so 
called.  If  the  reader  desire  farther  satisfaction  herein,  let 
him  but  read  thatvery  treatise  which  Mr.  B.  excepts  against, 
where  he  will  find  abundantly  enough  for  the  clearing  of  my 
intendment.  Or  to  him,  that  loses  his  time  in  perusing  this 
appendix,  I  shall  recommend  the  foregoing  treatise,  for  the 
same  purpose.  * 

3.  For  what  Mr.  B.  ascribes  to  our  works,  I  shall  not 
(for  my  part)  much  trouble  myself  whilst  I  live,  being  little 
or  not  at  all  concerned  therein.  He  is  not  for  me  to  deal 
with. 

TiKT£i  Toi  Kopog  'v(3piv  OT  ov  TTokv  oXjSoc  fTnjTat.  Theog. 

If  I  dispute  in  print  any  more  (as  I  hope  I  shall  not),  it 
shall  be  with  them,  that  understanding  my  meaning,  will 
fairly,  closely,  and  distinctly  debate  the  thing  in  difference, 
and  not  insisting  on  words  and  expressions  to  no  purpose 
(especially  if  their  own  haste  allows  them  not  oftentimes  to 
speak  congruously)  shall  press  and  drive  the  things  them- 
selves to  their  issue. 

Dabitur  ignis  tarnenetsi  ab  inimicis  petam. 

Mr.  B.  proceeds  in  his  second  section  to  prove,  that  all 
the  elect  are  not  justified  at  the  death  of  Christ.  In  this 
passage  one  expression  of  mine,  about  the  sense  of  Rom. 
iv.  5.  is  taken  notice  of;  but  that  relates  to  a  business  of  a 
greater  importance  than  to  be  now  mentioned.  Something 
Mr.  B.  discourses  about  the  state  and  condition  of  the  elect 
in  reference  to  the  death  of  Christ :  some  texts  to  that  pur- 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  271 

pose  he  considers  ;  but  so  jejunely,  so  much  below  the  ma- 
jesty of  the  mystery  of  grace  in  this  particular,  that  I  shall 
not  make  his  discourse  an  occasion  of  what  maybe  offered 
on  that  account.  Something  I  have  spoken  in  the  former 
treatise,  concerning  the  transaction  of  the  compact  and 
acrreement,  that  was  between  the  Father  and  Son,  about  the 
salvation  of  the  elect.  Of  their  interest  and  concernment 
therein,  with  the  state  of  his  body,  of  those  that  were  given 
him,  on  that  account,  God  assisting,  hereafter. 

But,  p.  228.  from  words  of  mine,  which  from  several 
places  of  my  treatise  are  put  together,  he  makes  sundry  in- 
ferences, and  opposes  to  them  all  two  conclusions  of  his 
own,  p.  229. 

'This  man(says  he)  seems  to  judge,  that  the  name  of  com- 
plete justification  is  proper  to  that  in  conscience,  and  not  to 
be  given  to  any  before  :  he  seems  also  to  judge,  that  justifi- 
cation hath  degrees  and  parts  at  many  hundred  or  thousand 
years  distanced  one  from  another ;  or  else  absolution  at  least 
hath,  which  we  have  hitherto  taken  for  the  same  thing  with 
justification  :  for  he  calls  that  in  conscience  complete  justi- 
fication :  so  saith  he,  absolution  in  heaven  and  justification 
differ  as  part  and  whole  ;'  so  he  : 

'  Egregie  Cordatus  homo  Catus  Eliu'  Sextus  !' 

It  seems  Mr.  B.  knows  not  what  my  judgment  is,  by  his 
repeating,  that,  'it  seems  this  is  his  judgment;'  he  might 
have  staid  from  his  confutation  of  it,  until  he  had  known  it : 
it  is  not  for  his  honour  that  he  hath  done  otherwise. 

I  deny  that  it  is  my  judgment,  that  the  name  of  complete 
justification  is  proper  to  that  in  conscience.  Nor  do  I  know 
of  any  proper  or  complete  justification  in  conscience  ;  I  only 
said,  complete  justification  is  terminated  in  conscience.  If 
Mr.  B.  know  not  what  I  mean  thereby,  let  him  stay  a  little, 
and  I  shall  explain  myself. 

It  is  most  false,  that  I  judge  justification  to  have  degrees 
and  parts  at  a  hundred  or  thousand  years  distance ;  unless 
under  the  name  of  justification  you  comprise  all  the  causes 
and  effects  of  it,  and  then  it  reaches  from  everlasting  to  ever- 
lasting. 

That  absolution  in  heaven  (as  I  call  it)  is  before  our  ac- 
tual believing  in    order  of  time,  I  have  nowhere  said,  but 


272  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

only  in  order  of  nature  ;  and  that  Mr.  B.  hath  not  dis- 
proved. 

What  Mr.  B,  thinks  of  absolution  and  justification  to  be 
the  same,  is  no  rule  to  us ;  when  he  proves  it,  so  it  is :  but 
to  what  I  and  others  have  said,  Mr.  B.  opposes  two  conclu- 
sions, p.  229.  whereof  the  first  is, 

'1.  We  did  neither  really,  nor  in  God's  account  die  with 
Christ  when  he  died,  nor  in  him  satisfy  God's  justice,  nor 
fulfil  the  law.'     The  second, 

*  2.  Though  Christ  was  given  for  the  elect  more  than  for 
others,  yet  is  he  no  more  given  to  them  than  to  others ;  be- 
fore they  are  born,  or  before  they  have  faith.' 

The  first  of  these,  he  saith,  (he  means  the  first  of  them 
before-mentioned,  which  the  first  of  these  is  set  down  in 
opposition  unto),  is  of  so  great  '  moment,  and  is  the  heart 
and  root  of  so  many  errors,  yea  of  the  whole  body  of  an- 
tinomianism,  that  I  had  rather  write  as  great  a  volume  as 
this,'  &c. 

What  it  is  that  I  intended  by  dying  with  Christ,  Mr, 
Baxter  does  not  know,  nor  guess  near  the  matter.  The  con- 
sideration of  God's  giving  the  elect  to  Christ,  of  his  consti- 
tution to  be  a  common  person,  a  Mediator  and  surety,  of  the 
whole  compact  and  covenant  between  Father  and  Son,  of 
his  absolution  as  a  common  person,  of  the  sealing,  confirma- 
tion, and  the  establishment  of  the  covenant  of  grace  by  his 
death,  of  the  economy  of  the  Holy  Spirit  founded  therein, 
of  the  whole  grant  made  upon  his  ascension,  must  precede 
the  full  and  clear  interpretation  of  that  expression.  For  the 
present  it  may  suffice  ;  I  have  not  said  that  we  did  satisfy 
God's  justice  in  him,  or  satisfy  the  law  in  him,  so  that  we 
should  be  (personally  considered),  the  principals  of  the  sa- 
tisfaction or  obedience ;  nor  that  we  so  died  in  him,  as  to 
be  justified,  or  absolved  actually  upon  his  death,  before  we 
are  born  ;  so  that  I  shall  not  be  concerned  at  all  if  Mr. 
Baxter's  thoughts  should  incline  him  to  write  a  volume 
as  big  as  this,  about  his  confession,  which  is  no  small  con- 
tent tome. 

For  the  second  ;  '  that  Christ  was  given  to  the  elect  more 
than  others,'  I  say  not ;  because  I  say,  that  he  was  not  given, 
as  a  Mediator,  price,  and  ransom,  for  any  other  at  all.  When 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  273 

the  demonstrations  that  *  Christ  died  for  all,'  which  Mr. 
Baxter  hath  somewhile  talked  of,  are  published,  I  may  per- 
haps find  cause  (if  I  see  them)  to  change  my  mind  :  but  as 
yet  I  do  not  suppose  that  I  shall  so  do.  That  he  is  given  to 
any  before  they  are  born,  I  have  not  said ;  though  they  are 
given  to  him  before  they  are  born;  or  that  he  is  given  to 
them  in  order  of  time  before  they  do  believe  ;  but  this  I  say, 
that  faith  and  forgiveness  of  sin  is  given  them  for  his  sake  : 
which,  when  Mr.  Baxter  disproves,  or  pretends  so  to  do, 
I  shall  farther  consider  it,  as  being  a  matter  of  importance  : 
with  his  strife  of  words  (if  I  can  choose)  I  shall  no  more 
trouble  myself. 

This  process  being  made  ;  sect.  3.  Mr.  Baxter  lays  down 
the  conclusion  as  contrary  to  them  before,  which  (as  he  in- 
forms me),  are  maintained  by  myself  and  others. 

'  No  man  nowliving,  was  justified,  pardoned,  or  absolved 
actually  from  the  guilt  of  sin  and  obligation  to  death  at  the 
time  of  Christ's  death  or  undertaking,  or  from  eternity,  or  at 
any  time  before  he  was  born,  or  did  believe.' 

After  I  know  not  how  many  arguments  brought  forth  to 
confirm  this  position,  my  arguments  against  it  are  produced 
and  answered  ;  but  what  the  learned  man  means  I  profess  I 
know  not:  unless  'disputandi  prurigine  abreptus,'  he  cares 
not  what  he  says,  nor  against  whom,  so  he  may  multiply  ar- 
guments and  answers,  and  put  forth  books  one  upon  another. 
In  that  very  book  of  mine  which  he  animadverts  upon,  I  use 
sundry  of  those  very  arguments,  which  here  he  useth,  to 
prove  the  same  assertion  for  the  substance  of  it,  as  Mr.  Bax- 
ter hath  here  laid  down.  And  this  I  had  assured  him,  as  to  a 
former  mistake  of  his.  My  words  are,  p.  33.  [p.  599.J  *  as  for 
evangelical  justification,  whereby  a  sinner  is  completely  jus- 
tified, that  it  should  precede  believing,  I  have  not  only  not 
asserted,  but  positively  denied,  and  disproved  by  many  ar- 
guments :  to  be  now  traduced  as  a  patron  of  that  opinion, 
and  my  reasons  for  it  publicly  answered,  seems  to  me  some- 
what uncouth.'  Farther  now  to  acquit  myself  from  that, 
which  nothing  but  self-fulness,  oscitancy,  and  contempt  of 
others,  can  possibly  administer  any  suspicion  of,  I  shall  not 
turn  aside. 

Yea,  but  I  have  said,  'that  the  elect  upon  the  death  of 
Christ,  have  aright  to  all  the  fruit  of  the  death  of  Christ,  to 


274         OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST, 

be  enjoyed  in  the  appointed  season  ;'  because  this  is  made 
the  occasion  of  so  many  outcries  of  Antinomianism,  and  I 
know  not  what,  I  shall  direct  the  reader  to  what  I  have  af- 
firmed in  this  case,  and  leave  it  with  some  brief  observa- 
tions to  his  judgment,  having  somewhat  else  to  do,  than  to 
engage  myself  in  a  long  wordy  contest  with  Mr.  Baxter ; 
who  knowing  not  of  any  difference  between  himself  and  me 
would  very  fain  make  one,  wherein  he  may  possibly  find 
his  labour  prevented  hereafter,  and  a  real  difference  stated 
between  us,  if  any  of  his  rare  notions  fall  in  my  way. 

The  discourse  is,  p.  69.  lin.  23.  unto  p.  72.  lin.  24. 

The  sum  of  all  is  this  ;  upon  the  death  of  Christ,  that  is, 
on  the  consideration  of  the  death  of  Christ;  upon  his  un- 
dertaking (for  surely  I  suppose  it  will  be  granted,  that 
his  death  was  no  less  effectual  upon  his  undertaking  to  them 
who  died  before  his  incarnation,  than  afterward  upon  his 
actual  accomplishment  of  that  undertaking)  to  be  a  Media- 
tor and  Redeemer,  it  becomes  just,  right,  and  equal,  that  all 
the  good  things  which  are  the  fruits  of  his  death  should  be 
in  a  due  and  appointed  season  made  out  to  them  for  whom 
he  died,  in  their  several  generations. 

What  says  Mr.  Baxter  to  this  ?  1 .  Suppose  this  be  so, 
yet  they  are  not  actually  absolved,  but  only  have  a  right  to 
it ;  who  said  they  were  ?  do  I  offer  to  make  any  such  con- 
clusion ?  do  I  dispute  against  Mr.  Baxter's  position,  or  for 
justification  upon,  or  at  the  death  of  Christ,  or  his  under- 
taking? 'homini  homo  quid  interest?' 

But  I  say,  there  being  such  a  right  to  these  good  things, 
they  have  a  right  to  them.  '  Crimen  inauditum  Caie  Cae- 
sar !'  Did  I  not  also  say  how  I  understood  that  expression? 
though  I  used  it  to  make  out  the  thing  I  intended,  yet  did 
I  not  say  directly,  that  that  right  was  not  subjectively  in 
them ;  that  is,  that  it  was  not  actionable  as  I  expressed  it ; 
that  they  could  not  plead  it ;  but  it  was  as  above  ?  Yea,  but 
then  this  is  no  more  but  non  injustum  est  this  is  false,  as 
I  have  shewed.  Many  divines  think,  that  this  was  the  es- 
tate between  God  and  sinners  antecedently  to  the  conside- 
ration of  the  death  of  Christ,  or  might  have  been  without 
it,  viz.  that  it  was  not  unjust  with  God  to  pardon  and  save 
them :  by  the  death  of  Christ  there  is  a  jus  of  another  na- 
ture obtained ;  even  such  as  I  have  described  in  the  treatise 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  275 

Mr.  Baxter  opposeth :  but  then  God  doth  not  give  those 
good  things  to  us  upon  condition ;  I  say  he  doth  not,  taking 
condition  in  its  strict  and  proper  sense  in  respect  of  God  ; 
though  he  hath  made  one  thing  to  be  the  condition  of  an- 
other. All  graces  are  alike  absolutely  purchased  for  us ; 
but  not  alike  absolutely  received  by  us :  the  economy  of  the 
gospel  requires  another  order :  the  first  grace,  Mr.  Baxter 
confesseth,  is  bestowed  upon  us  absolutely,  and  without 
condition;  and  this  grace  is  the  condition  of  the  following 
privileges,  as  to  the  order  of  communication :  and  all  the 
difference  between  us  is  about  the  sense  of  the  word  condi- 
tion in  that  place,  which,  when  I  have  nothing  else  to  do, 
I  will  write  a  volume  as  big  as  this  is  about. 

This  is  that  1  say,  Christ  hath  purchased  all  good  things 
for  us  ;  these  things  are  actually  to  be  conferred  upon  us  in 
the  time  and  order  by  God's  sovereign  will  determined  and 
disposed.  This  order,  as  revealed  in  the  gospel,  is,  that  we 
believe  and  be  justified,  &,c.  Faith  whereby  we  believe  is 
bestowed  on  us  absolutely,  always  without  condition,  some- 
times without  outward  means.  This  faith,  by  the  constitu- 
tion of  God,  is  attended  with  the  privileges  contended  about; 
which  are  no  less  purchased  for  us  by  Christ,  than  faith 
itself.  Yea,  the  purchase  of  our  justification  or  acceptation 
with  God,  is,  in  order  of  nature,  antecedent  in  consideration 
to  the  purchase  of  faith  for  us :  if  Mr.  Baxter  hath  a  mind  to 
oppose  any  thing  of  this  (which  is  all  that  as  yet  to  this  bu- 
siness I  have  declared),  let  him  do  it  when  he  pleaseth  ;  and 
if  iihe  tantide)n{Q.she  speaketh),  I  shall  give  him  a  farther 
account  of  my  thoughts  about  it :  but  he  would  know  what 
I  mean  by  Christ's  undertaking  for  the  elect ;  let  him  con- 
sider what  I  have  delivered  about  the  covenant  between  the 
Father  and  Son  in  this  business,  and  he  will  know  at  least 
what  I  intend  thereby ;  he  will  see  how  Christ,  being  then  only 
God,  did  undertake  the  business  to  do  it,  not  as  God  only  ; 
and  withal  the  wideness  of  that  exception,  that  the  pro- 
phecy of  Isaiah  was  written  a  long  time  after,  and  could  not 
give  any  such  right  as  is  pretended.  A  right  is  given  there 
in  respect  of  manifestation,  not  constitution.  Isaiah,  in  that 
prophecy,  speaks  of  things  to  come  as  past,  ver.  5,  6.  and 
of  things  past  and  present,  as  to  come;  it  reveals,  not  con- 
stitutes, a  covenant.    But  he  saith,  we  use  to  distinguish  be- 


276 


OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 


tween  the  undertaking  and  accomplishment:  divines  use  to 
say,  that  upon  man's  fall  Christ  undertook  satisfaction,  but 
it  was  in  the  fulness  of  time  that  he  accomplished  it ;  how, 
therefore,  he  accomplished  it  in  the  undertaking,  I  do  not 
well  see.  2.  But  that  he  did  perfectly  accomplish  what  he 
undertook  I  easily  grant.  But  how  you  learned  divines 
distinguish  I  know  not:  this  I  know,  that  such  poor  men 
as  myself  do  believe,  that,  as  to  the  efficacy  of  satisfaction 
and  merit,  Christ's  undertaking  was  attended  with  no  less 
than  his  actual  accomplishment  of  what  he  undertook  ;  or 
we  know  not  how  to  grant  salvation  to  the  saints  under  the 
Old  Testament :  it  was  concerning  their  efficacy  as  to  merit, 
not  their  distinction  between  themselves,  that  I  spake. 

These  things  being  premised,  Mr.  B.  proceeds  to  answer 
my  arguments,  which  were  produced  to  prove,  that  upon 
the  death  of  Christ,  there  was  a  right  obtained  for  the  elect 
to  all  the  benefits  of  his  d-eath  ;  this  right  residing  in  the 
justice  of  God,  or  in  the  equalling  of  these  things  by  divine 
constitution  (as  I  fully  declared  in  the  place  by  Mr.  B.  op- 
posed) :  upon  the  interposing  of  some  expressions  in  the  pro- 
cess of  my  discourse,  of  the  grant  being  made  to  the  elect, 
and  mentioning  of  their  right,  which  in  what  sense  they  were 
to  be  taken  I  expressly  declared,  Mr.  B,  takes  advantage 
to  answer  them  all  with  this  intendment  put  upon  them, 
that  they  aimed  to  prove  a  subjective  personal  right,  which 
at  any  time  they  may  plead,  when  the  utmost  that  my  words 
can  be  extended  unto  is,  that  they  have  it  ex  fcedere  not 
realiter :  for  the  subject  of  it,  I  place  elsewhere.  Now  if 
Mr.  B.  will  send  me  word,  that  he  supposes  he  hath  an- 
swered my  arguments,  as  they  were  proposed  to  my  own 
purpose,  I  will  promise,  if  I  live,  to  return  him  an  answer.  In 
the  mean  time  I  shall  have  no  itch  to  be  scribbling  to  no 
purpose ;  '  ego  me,  tua  causa,  ne  erres,  non  rupturus  sum ;' 
yet  of  the  whole  he  may  for  the  present  be  pleased  to  receive 
the  ensuing  account,  both  as  to  the  nature  of  q.jus  and  its 
application. 

For  the  description  of  jus,  Mr.  B.  relies  on  Grotius,  and 
something  also  he  mentions  out  of  Sayrus.    Grotius,  in  the 
first  chapter  of  his  book  '  De  jure  Belli  et  Pacis,'  in  the  sec 
tions  transcribed  (in  part)  by  Mr.  B.  and  some  others,  ex- 
presses (in  his  way)  the  distinction  given  at  the  beginning 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  277 

both  of  the  Institutions  and  Digests  ohontjns  and  those 
also  which  they  handle  under  the  head  '  de  statu.'  So  do 
all  men  commonly  that  write  of  that  subject ;  how  exactly 
this  is  done  by  Grotius,  those  who  are  learned  in  the  law 
will  judge  ;  for  my  part,  I  am  so  far  at  liberty,  as  not  to  be 
concluded  by  his  bare  affirmation  either  as  to  law  or  gos- 
pel. Yet  neither  doth  he  exclude  the  right  by  me  intended  ; 
he  tells  us,  indeed,  ih^it  fa cultas,  which  the  lawyers  call  sui 
is  that  which  properly  and  strictly  he  intends  to  call  jus. 
But  the  other  member  of  the  distinction  he  terms  o/>^i^Mc?o, 
which  though  in  a  natural  sense  it  respects  the  subject  im- 
mediately, yet  he  tells  you,  that  in  the  sense  of  Michael 
Ephesius,  which  he  contradicts  not,  it  is  but  to  irpi-rrov,  '  id 
quod  convenit,'  which  respects  only  the  order  of  things 
among  themselves.  And  though  out  of  Aristotle  he  calls  it 
also  a^id,  yet  that  word  (as  he  also  afterward  expounds  it 
•out  of  Cicero)  is  of  much  a  lower  signification  than  many 
imagine.  This  to  Trpirrov,  is  that  which  I  assert ;  and  Say- 
rus's  definition  of  jus  ad  rem  may  also  be  allowed. 

But  for  others;  jus,  artificially  is,  ars  honi  et  cequi ; 
Ponz.  de  lamiis  num.  14.  Tom.  11.  jus  Gregor.  p.  2,  and  D. 
D.  cap.  1.  Celsus.  though  some  dispute  against  this  defini- 
tion, as  Conanus,  Comment.  Jur.  Civil,  lib.  1.  cap.  1.  That 
which  is  (cquurn  is  the  subject  of  it.  So  the  Comedian, 
'  quid  cum  illis  agat,  qui  neque  jus,  neque  bonum,  neque 
sequumsciunt.'  Terent.  Heauton.  all  termessequipollent.  And 
in  this  sense,  one  that  is  not  born  may  have  a  jus,  if  it  be 
in  a  thing  that  is  profitable  to  him  ;  *  quod  dicimus  eum  qui 
nasci  speratur  pro  superstite  esse,  tunc  verum  est,  cum  de 
ipsius  jure  quseritur,  alias  non  prodest,  nisi  natus  sit.'  Pau- 
lus  de  verbor.  significat.  which  one  interpretation  will  over- 
bear with  me  a  hundred  modern  exceptioners,  if  they  should 
deny  that  a  man  may  be  said  to  have  a  right  unless  he  him- 
self be  the  immediate  subject  of  the  right,  as  if  it  were  a 
natural  accident  inherent  in  him:  so  is  it  in  the  case  pro- 
posed by  Cicero,  in  Secundo  de  Inventione.  *  Pater-fami- 
lias  cum  liberorum  nihil  haberet,  uxorem  autem  haberet,  in 
Testamento  ita  scripsit.  Si  mihi  filius  genitus  fuerit  unus, 
pluresve,  hie  mihi  hgeres  esto.'  The  father  dies  before  the 
son  is  born  ;  a  right  accrues  to  him  that  is  not  born.  Such 
a  right  I  say  there  is,  although  this  right  is  not  immediately 


278  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

actionable.  Gaius  tells  us,  that '  actio  est  prosecutio  juris 
sui.'  This  jus  siium,  is  that  which  Grotius  calls  facultas, 
and  is  jus  proprie  et  stride  dictum.  And  this  jms  suum  I  did 
not  intend,  in  that  I  said  it  was  not  actionable;  and, 
therefore,  whereas  Conanus  says,  that  'nullum  est  jus,  cui 
non  sit  aut  a  natura,  aut  a  lege  data  qusedam  obligatio,  tan- 
quam  comes  etadjutrix,'  Comment,  juris  Civil,  lib.  2.  cap.  1. 
which  obligation  is  the  foundation  of  action:  it  is  evident, 
that  he  intends  jus  proprie  et  stricte  dictum ;  for  Gaius  dis- 
tinguisheth  between Jms  utendi,fruendi,  and  jus  obligationis, 
D.  lib.  1.  1.  8.  which  he  could  not  do,  if  all  and  every 
right  had  an  obligation  attending  it.  And  such  is  that  right 
whereof  we  speak ;  if  any  one  thinks  to  plead  it,  he  will 
be  like  him  whom  the  lawyers  call,  *  agentem  sine  ac- 
tione,'  of  whom  they  dispute,  '  an  liceat  ei  experiri,'  and 
whether  his  plea  be  to  be  admitted  ;  concerning  which  the 
variety  of  cases  and  opinions  are  repeated  by  Menochius  de 
Arbit.  Judic.  lib.  1.  Qu.  16.  2. 

And  such  ajus  as  this,  ariseth  '  ex  contractibus  innomina- 
tis;  for  as  *  jus  ex  innominato  contractu  oritur,  quum  ex 
parte  debentis,  implere  id  quod  convenerat,  impletum  est/ 
Ludovic.  Roman.  Consul.  86.  p.  23.  so  '  ex  contractu  inno- 
minato, non  transeunt  actiones  sine  mandato,'  as  Bartholus 
tells  us;  for  though  the  covenant  between  Father  and  Son, 
whence  this  right  ariseth,  be  not  in  itself  of  the  nature  of  a 
'contractus  innominatus,  do  ut  des/  yet  to  them  it  is  of 
that  import.  Hence  the  Socinians,  who  are  skilled  in  the 
law,  though  they  wholly  suspend  the  actual  obtaining  of 
remission  of  sins  upon  the  fulfilling  of  the  conditions  re- 
quired, do  yet  grant,  that  a  plenary  ;ws  or  right  of  obtaining 
forgiveness  of  sins  was  given  to  all  in  the  death  of  Christ ; 
*jam  vero  quidnam  mediator  foederis,  ab  una  paciscentium 
parte  legatus,  et  ipsius  sponsor  constitutus,  ac  quoddam  ve- 
luti  testamentum  ejus  nomine  constituens,  qua  talis  est, 
aliud  prsestat,  quam  ut  jus  alteri  parti,  et  jus  quidem  plenum 
largiatur,  ad  foederis  hujus,  aut  testamenti  promissa  conse- 
quenda  ;  obstringit  nimirum  atque  obligat  promissorem  qui 
ipsum  obligaverat  ad  servandaToederum  promissa,  eaque  rata 
prorsus  habenda.'  Crellius  de  causis  mortis  Christi,  p.  9. 
So,  in  the  common  speech  of  the  ancients,  Budseus  tells  us, 
that  'bonum  jus  dicere,'  is  as  much  as  that  which  is  now 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  279 

vulgarly  expressed,  *  requesta  tua  rationabilis  est :'  if  there 
be  an  equity  in  the  thing,  there  is  a  jus  belonging  to  the 
person.  Any  thing  that  made  it  equitable  that  a  man  should 
be  regarded,  they  called  his  jws;  whence  is  his  complaint 
in  Plautus,  finding  himself  every  way  unworthy  ;  '  sine  mo- 
do  et  modestia  sum,  sine  bono  jure,  atque  honore  :'  Bachid. 
and  Paulus,  in  lib.  3.  fF.  de  servitut.  urb.  prced.  'Nejus  sit 
vicino  invitis  nobis  altius  sedificare.'  It  were  very  facile, 
both  from  lawyers  and  most  approved  authors,  to  multiply 
instances  of  this  large  acceptation  of  the  word  jws,  or  right. 
And  whether  the  grant  of  the  Father,  and  purchase  of  the 
Mediator  before  mentioned,  be  not  sufficient  to  constitute  or 
denominate  such  a  jus  or  right  in  them,  for  whom,  and  whose 
profit  and  benefit  the  grant  is  made,  I  question  not.  Again 
consider  that  of  Paulus.  lib.  11.  ad  Edict.  D.D.  de  verb, 
signif.  Tit.  16.  'Princeps  bona  concedendo,  videtur  etiam 
obligationem  concedere  ;'  which  adds  a  propriety  to  the  'jus' 
as  was  shewed  before.  Yet  that  it  should  be  presently  ac- 
tionable doth  not  follow  :  *  Actio  est  jus  persequendi  in  ju- 
dicio,  quod  sibi  debetur ;'  Institut.  lib.  4.  de  action.  Every 
*jus  ad  rem,'  is  not  'jus  persequendi  in  judicio:'  whence  is 
the  gloss  of  Aldobrondinus  on  that  place  :  '  nee  facias  ma- 
gnam  vim  ibi :  quia  cum  multas  habeat  significationes  haec 
dictio  jus,  ut  fF.  de  inst.  et  jus  1.  p.  et,  si,  hoc  est  unum  de  sig- 
nificatis  ejus, utdicatur  jus  agendivel  persequendi:'  besides 
it  must  be,  rjuod  sibi  debetur,  that  is  actionable ;  the  obli- 
gation whence  that  dehitum  arises,  being,  as  the  lawyers 
speak,  mater  actionis  ;  but  yet  even  *  debere'  itself  is  of  so 
large  and  various  signification  in  the  law,  both  in  respect  to 
things  and  persons,  as  will  not  admit  of  any  determinate 
sense  unless  otherwise  restrained,  fF.  de  verbor.  signif.  b. 
pecuniae  §  8.  si.  Yea,  and  on  the  other  side,  sometimes  a  plea 
may  lie  where  there  is  no  dehitum  :  '  quandoque  ago  etiam 
ad  id  quod  mihi  non  debetur;  R.  de  pact.  1.  si  pacto  quo 
poenam  ;  nam  ibi  non  ago  ad  id  quod  est  debitum,  sed  ad  id 
quod  ex  nudo  pacto  convenit :'  that  Mr.  B.  may  know  what 
to  do  with  his  schemes  of  actions,  produced  on  the  account 
of  my  assertions. 

This  for  the  word,  and  my  use  of  it ;  I  hope  in  the  things 
of  God  about  words,  I  shall  not  much  contend.  I  had  rather 
indeed  insist  on  the  propriety  of  words,  in  the  originals,  their 


280  OF    THE    DEATH  OF    CHRIST, 

use  in  the  law,  and  amongst  men,  so  all  be  regulated  by  the 
analogy  of  faith,  than  to  square  the  things  of  God  to  the  terms 
and  rules  of  art  and  philosophy,  to  which,  without  doubt, 
they  will  not  answer.  Let  any  man  living  express  any  doc- 
trine of  the  gospel  whatever,  in  the  exactest  manner,  with 
artificial  philosophical  terms,  and  I  will  undertake  to  shew 
that  in  many  things  the  truth  is  wrested  and  fettered  there- 
by, and  will  not  bear  an  exact  correspondence  with  them  ; 
yet  hence  are  many  of  our  learned  strifes,  which  as  they 
have  little  of  learning  in  them,  so  for  my  part  I  value  them 
not  at  a  nutshell,  properly  so  called. 

This  being  premised,  his  answers  to  my  arguments  may 
very  briefly  be  considered. 

My  first  argument  is.  It  is  justum,  that  they  should 
have  the  fruits  of  the  death  of  Christ  bestowed  on  them  : 
therefore  they  have  j«s  unto  them;  for,  'jus  est  quod  jus- 
tum  est.' 

Mr.  B.  denies  the  consequence,  and  says,  though  it  be 
•justum,'  yet  they  may  not  be  subjects  of  this  jus :  to  this 
I  have  answered,  by  shewing  what  is  jus  in  general,  and 
what  is  their jMs  and  where  fixed. 

2.  He  questions  the  antecedent ;  for  the  confirmation 
whereof,  and  its  vindication  from  his  exceptions,  I  refer  the 
reader  to  what  I  had  written  of  the  covenant,  between  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  some  good  while  before  I  saw  Mr.  Bax- 
ter's animadversions,  or  that  they  were  public. 

My  second  is.  That  which  is  procured  for  any  one,  there- 
unto he  hath  a  right ;  the  thing  that  is  obtained,  is  granted 
by  him  of  whom  it  is  obtained,  and  that  to  them,  for  whom 
it  is  obtained.      To  this  is  answered, 

1.  In  the  margin  ;  '  That  I  should  make  great  changes  in 
England,  if  I  could  make  all  the  lawyers  believe  this  strange 
doctrine:'  but  of  what  the  lawyers  believe,  or  do  not  believe, 
Mr,  B.  is  no  competent  judge,  be  it  spoken  without  dispa- 
ragement, for  the  law  is  not  his  study.  I  v/ho  (perhaps)  have 
much  less  skill  than  himself,  will  be  bound  at  any  time  to 
give  him  twenty  cases,  out  of  the  civil  and  canon  law,  to  make 
good  this  assertion  ;  which  if  he  knows  not  that  it  may  be 
done,  he  ought  not  to  speak  with  such  confidence  of  these 
things.  Nay,  amongst  our  own  lawyers  (whom  perhaps  he 
intends)  I  am  sure  he  may  be  informed,  that  if  a  man  inter- 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  281 

cede  with  another  to  settle  his  land  by  conveyance  to  a  third 
person,  giving  him  that  conveyance  to  keep  in  trust,  until 
the  time  come,  that  he  should  by  the  intention  of  the  con- 
veyer enjoy  the  land,  though  he  for  whom  it  is  granted,  have 
not  the  least  knowledge  of  it,  yet  he  hath  such  a  right  unto 
the  land  thereby  created,  as  cannot  be  disannulled. 

But  2.  He  says,  'That  the  fruits  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
are  procured  for  us,  Jinaliter  not  subjective.' 

Ans.  They  are  procured  for  us  objective,  are  granted, '  ex 
ad  sequatione  rerum,'  and  may  make  us  subjects  of  the  right, 
though  not  of  the  things  themselves,  which  it  regards ;  may, 
I  say,  though  I  do  not  say  it  doth.  The  following  similitudes 
of  my  horse,  and  a  king,  have  no  correspondency  with  this 
business  at  all ;  of  the  right  of  horses,  there  is  nothing  in 
the  law:  in  the  latter,  there  is  nothing  omitted  in  the  com- 
parison, but  merit,  and  purchase,  which  is  all. 

3.  All  the  fruits  of  the  death  of  Christ  are  obtained  and 
procured  by  his  merit  for  them  for  whom  he  died. 

Mr.  B. '  1.  Not  all,  not  the  same  measure  of  sanctification 
for  one  as  for  another  :  not  faith  for  all  for  whom  he  died,  as 
for  his  elect. 

'  2.  He  procured  it  for  us  as  the  Jinis  cui,  not  subjects  of  the 
present  right.' 

Ans.  1 .  The  substance  of  the  fruits  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
and  the  ultimate  end,  belongs  to  his  purchase  :  the  measure 
and  degrees  of  them  to  the  Father's  sovereign  disposal,  ad 
ornatum  uiiiversi. 

2.  It  is  most  false,  that  Christ  did  not  purchase  faith  for 
all,  for  whom  he  died. 

3.  What  our  right  is,  hath   been  before  delivered;  the 
Jinis  cui,  and  subject  of  a  present  right,  are  not  very  accu- 
rately opposed. 

4.  The  nature  of  merit  infers  an  attendant  right :  Rom. 
iv.  4. 

Mr.  B.  '  If  this  be  your  debt,  you  may  say.  Lord  I  have 
merited  salvation  in  Christ,  therefore  it  is  mine  of  debt. 
Christ  hath  of  debt  the  right  to  pardon  you,  you  have  no 
debt,  &c.' 

Ans.  Very  good ;  but  I  use  no  forms  of  prayer  of  other 
men's  composing;  who  said,  it  was  our  debt;  who  says  our 
right  is  actionable.    The  whole  here  intended,  is,  that  Christ 

VOL.    IX.  U 


282  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

meriting  pardon  of  sins  for  the  elect,  it  is  just  they  should 
obtain  it  in  the  appointed  season :  such  another  prayer  as  that 
here  mentioned,  doth  Mr.  B.  afterward  compose  in  a  suit- 
ableness as  he  supposes  to  my  principles;  but  what  may  he 
not  do,  or  say  ? 

4.  He  for  whom  a  ransom  is  paid,  hath  a  right  to  his 
liberty  by  virtue  of  that  payment. 

Mr.  B. 'All  unproved,  and  by  me  unbelieved.  If  you  pay 
a  sum  to  the  Turk  for  a  thousand  slaves,  thereby  buying  them 
absolutely  into  your  own  power,  I  do  not  believe  that  they 
have  any  more  right  to  freedom,  than  they  had  before.  If 
a  prince  pay  a  ransom  for  some  traitors  to  the  king  his  fa- 
ther, thereby  purchasing  to  himself  a  dominion  or  a  propriety 
over  them,  so  that  they  are  absolutely  his,  yet  I  think  it  gives 
them  no  more  right  than  they  had  before.' 

Ans.  1 .  I  suppose  it  is  not  yet  determined,  that  this  busi- 
ness is  to  be  regulated  absolutely  according  to  what  Mr.  B. 
thinks  or  believes.  For  I  must  needs  say,  that  whether  he 
believes  it  or  no,  I  am  still  of  the  same  mind  that  I  was. 

He  for  whom  a  ransom  is  paid,  hath  a  right  to  a  deliver- 
ance ;  as  to  him,  to  whom  the  ransom  was  paid  :  if  Mr.  B. 
believes  not  this,  let  him  consult  the  civil  lawyers,  with  whom 
he  is  so  conversant :  Tit.  de  pact. 

2.  I  say,  that  the  law  of  redemption  requires,  that  the 
redeemed  be  at  the  disposal  of  the  redeemer,  where  he  hath 
no  plea  jure  pustiUminii ;  and  it  is  most  certain,  that  Christ 
hath  a  dominion  over  his  elect  (for  a  propriety  over  them 
I  understand  not),  yet,  that  dominion  is  the  proximate  end 
of  the  death  of  Christ,  under  the  notion  of  a  ransom,  price, 
or  purchase  (which  yet  are  of  various  considerations  also),  is 
the  ttqCotov  tpev^oQ  of  tliis  discourse. 

Having  given  this  specimen  of  Mr.  B.'s  answers  to  my 
instances,  as  an  addition  to  the  former  explication  given  of 
my  judgment  in  this  business,  I  shall  not  farther  trouble  the 
reader  with  the  consideration  of  what  of  that  same  kind 
ensues. 

To  tell  the  whole  truth,  I  expressed  the  effects  of  the 
death  of  Christ,  in  the  manner  above-mentioned,  to  obviate 
that  stating  of  his  satisfaction,  and  the  use  of  it,  which  I  had 
observed  to  be  insisted  on  by  the  remonstrants  in  their  apo- 
logy, and  in  other  writings  of  theirs,  but  especially  by  Epis- 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  283 

copius.  For  some  time,  I  met  not  with  any  great  opposition 
made  to  the  expressions  of  their  imaginations  in  this  busi- 
ness, but  only  what  was  briefly  remarked  by  the  Leyden  pro- 
fessors in  their  '  specimina.'  Of  late  1  find  Voetius  reckoning 
it  among  the  principal  controversies,  that  we  have  with  the 
enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ.  I  shall  set  down  his  words 
about  it,  and  leave  them  to  the  consideration  of  them  who 
may  think  themselves  concerned  in  them. 

His  words  in  his  disputation,  '  de  merito  Christi,'  An. 
1650,  are  ;  '  Secunda  controversia  capitalis,  quae  Christi- 
anismo  cum  quibusdam  heterodoxis  (Remonstrantibus  sci- 
licet in  Belgio,  viris,  si  non  Socinianse,  saltem  dubiae  Theo- 
logise)  intercedit,  est  de  merito  Christi  pro  nobis,  hoc  est, 
vice,  et  loco  nostro,  et  sic  in  bonum  nostrum  actualiterprse- 
stito,  seu  de  satisfactione  plena  ac  proprie  a  Christo  sponsore, 
loco  nostro  justitioe  divinte  prsestita :  illi  satisfactionem  et 
meritum  sic  accipiunt,  quasi  nihil  aliud  sit,  quam  partis  of- 
fensee  talis  placatio  qua  ofFenso  hactenus  satisfit,  ut  in  gra- 
tiam  redire  velit  cum  eo  qui  offendit,  et  per  quara  Christus 
Deo  Patri  jus  et  voluntatem  acquisiverit  novum  fcedus  ine- 
undi  cum  hominibus.'  So  he. 

The  expression  of  our  dying  with  Christ  is  fallen  upon 
again,  p.  226.  of  which  he  desires  leave  to  speak  as  confi- 
dently as  myself;  truly  I  thought  he  had  not  been  to  ask 
leave  for  that  now.  But  why  may  he  not  use  it  without  leave 
as  well  as  others?  Some  perhaps  will  say, '  niira  edepolsunt 
ni  hie  in  ventrem,  sumpsit  confidentiam,'  to  consider  what  he 
hath  written  already.  But  with  this  leave  he  falls  a  conjec- 
turing at  what  I  mean  by  that  expression,  to  no  purpose  at 
all,  as  may  be  seen  by  what  I  have  delivered  concerning  it. 
The  like  I  may  say  to  the  passage  by  the  way  mentioned,  of 
the  right  which  ariseth  from  the  decree  of  God.  It  seems 
to  me,  that  what  God  hath  decreed  to  do  for  any,  that  is,  or 
may  be,  a  real  privilege  to  him;  it  is  jus,  ex  just  it  la  conde- 
centia,  that  in  the  appointed  season,  he  should  receive  it. 
If  Mr.  Baxter  be  otherwise  minded  I  cannot  help  it;  '  habeo 
aliquid  magis  ex  memet,  et  majus,'  than  that  I  should  attend 
to  the  disputes  thereabout;  nor  will  1  stand  in  his  way  if  I 
can  choose,  for  he  seems  to  cry — *  ad  terram  dabo,  et  denti- 
legos  omnes  mortales  faciam  quemque  ofFendero.' 

After  this  1  find  not  myself  particularly  smitten,  until  he 

u  2 


284  OF    THE     DEATH     OF    CHRIST, 

comes  to  the  close  of  the  chapter  to  talk  of  '  idem'  and  '  tau- 
tidem  ;'  unless  it  be  in  his  passage,  p.  274.  That  which 
makes  me  suspect  that  I  am  there  intended,  is,  his  former 
imputation  of  some  such  thing  unto  me ;  namely,  that  I 
should  say,  that  the  deputation  of  Christ  in  our  stead,  is  an 
act  of  pardon.  But  I  suppose  that  I  have  so  fully  satisfied 
him  as  to  that  surmise,  by  shewing  that  not  only  my  sense, 
but  my  expressions  were,  not,  that  the  deputation  of  Christ 
was  our  pardon,  but  that  the  freedom  of  pardon  did  in  part 
depend  thereon,  that  I  will  not  take  myself  in  this  place  to 
be  concerned ;  because  I  cannot  do  it  and  prevent  the  re- 
turnal  of  a  charge  of  some  negligence  on  this  person,  whose 
writings  seem  sufficiently  to  free  him  from  all  just  suspicion 
thereof.  In  the  close  of  this  discourse  (with  the  method  of 
a  new  line)  Mr.  Baxter  falls  upon  the  consideration  of  the 
payment  made  by  Christ  in  our  stead,  or  the  penalty  that  he 
underwent  for  us ;  and  pleads,  that  it  was  not  the  idem  that 
was  due  to  us,  but  tantundem.  Although  some  say  this 
difference  is  not  tantidem,  as  some  speak,  it  seems,  yet  he  is 
resolved  of  the  contrary,  and  that  this  one  assertion  is  the 
bottom  of  all  Antinomianisni.  Seeing  I  profess  myself  to  be 
contrary  minded,  I  suppose  it  will  be  expected  that  I  should 
consider  what  is  here  to  the  purpose  in  hand  insisted  on  by 
Mr.  B.  What  I  intend  by  paying  the  idem,  or  rather  un- 
dergoing the  '  idem,'  that  we  should  have  done,  I  have  so 
fully  elsewhere  expressed,  that  I  shall  not  stay  the  reader 
with  the  repetition  of  it.  But,  says  Mr.  Baxter,  this  sub- 
verts the  substance  of  religion :  l^oh  podog,  Idov  Tr/jSrjjua. 
Now  you  shall  have  the  proofs  of  it;  the  idem,  saith  he,  *  is 
the  perfect  obedience,  or  the  full  punishment  of  the  man  him- 
self, and  in  case  of  personal  disobedience,  it  is  personal  pu- 
nishment that  the  law  requires;  that  is,  supUcium  ipsius  delin- 
quentis. 

Ans.  But,  the  idem  that  we  should  pay,  or  undergo,  is 
perfect  obedience  to  the  law,  and  proportionable  punishment 
by  the  God's  [Divine]  constitution,  for  disobedience.  This 
Christ  paid,  and  underwent ;  that  the  man  himself  should  un- 
dergo it  is  the  law  originally ;  but  the  undergoing  or  doing 
of  it,  by  another,  is  the  undergoing  of  the  idem,  I  think. 
It  is  personal  punishment  that  the  law  originally  requires  ; 
but  he  that  undergoes  the  punishment  (though  he  be  not 


AND     OF    JUSTIFICATION.  286 

personally  disobedient),  which  the  law  judgeth  to  him  that 
was  personally  disobedient,  undergoes  the  idem  that  the  law 
requires. 

The  idem  is  supphciam  delinqueiiti  debitum  by  who- 
ever it  be  undergone,  not  supplicium  ipsiits  delinquentis 
only. 

He  proceeds  :  '  The  law  never  threatened  a  surety,  nor 
granteth  any  liberty  of  substitution :  that  was  an  act  of  God 
above  the  law  ;  therefore  Christ  did  not  undergo  the  idem.' 
I  deny  the  consequence.  Nor  is  the  least  shadow  of  proof 
made  of  it.  The  question  is  not  whether  Christ  be  the 
sinner,  but  whether  he  underwent  that  which  was  due  to  the 
sinner. 

He  adds:  *  If  therefore  the  thing  due  was  paid,  it  was 
we  ourselves  morally  or  legally,  that  sufl'ered.'  I  know  not 
well  what  is  meant  by  morally  ;  but  however  I  deny  the 
consequence  ;  the  thing  itself  was  paid  by  another  for  us, 
and  the  punishment  itself  was  undergone  by  another,  in  our 
stead. 

That  which  follows,  falls  with  that  which  went  before, 
being  built  thereon.  *  It  could  not  be  ourselves  legally,' saith 
he, 'because  it  was  not  ourselves  naturally.'  Though  for  the 
security  of  the  hypothesis  opposed,  there  is  no  need  of  it, 
yet  I  deny  his  proposition,  also,  if  taken  universally.  A  man 
may  be  accounted  to  do  a  thing  legally  by  a  sponsor,  though 
he  do  it  not  in  his  own  person. 

But  he  says, '  If  it  had  been  ourselves  legally,  the  strictest 
justice  could  not  have  denied  us  a  present  deliverance, '  ipso 
facto,'  being  no  justice  can  demand  any  more  than  the  '  idem 
quod  debitur'  (as  Mr.  Baxter's  printer  speaks).  But  1.  It 
is  supposed,  that  all  legal  performance  of  any  thing,  by  any 
one,  must  be  done  in  his  own  person. 

2.  It  supposes,  that  there  is  such  an  end  as  deliverance 
assigned,  or  assignable,  to  the  offender's  own  undergoing 
of  the  penalty,  which  is  false. 

3.  The  reasons  and  righteo»sness  of  our  actual  deliver- 
ance at  the  time,  and  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  God,  and 
as  to  the  last  revealed  in  the  gospel,  upon  Christ's  perform- 
ance of  personal  obedience,  and  undergoing  the  penalty  due 
to  us  in  our  stead ;  which  are  founded  in  (he  economy  of 
the  Trinity,  voluntarily  engaged  into  for  the  accomplishing 


286  OF    THE    DEATH    OK    CHRIST, 

the  salvation  of  the  elect,  I  have  elsewhere  touched  on,  and 
may,  if  I  find  it  necessary,  hereafter  handle  at  large. 

That  which  is  feared  in  this  business  is,  that  if  the '  idem' 
be  paid,  then  according  to  the  law,  the  obligation  is  dis- 
solved, and  present  deliverance  follows.  But  if  by  the  law, 
be  meant  the  civil  law,  whence  these  terms  are  borrowed,  it 
is  most  certain,  that  any  thing,  instead  of  that  which  is  in  the 
obligation,  doth,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  law  dissolve 
the  obligation  ;  and  that  whether  it  be  paid  by  the  principal 
debtor,  or  delinquent,  or  any  for  him.  The  beginning  of  that 
section,  '  quibus  modis  toUitur  obligatio,'  lib.  3.  Instit. 
will  evince  this  sufficiently.  The  title  of  the  section  is,  '  Si 
solvitur  id  quod  debetur,  vel  aliud  loco  illius,  consentiente 
creditore,  omnis  toUitur  obligatio,  turn  rei  principalis,  quam 
fide-jussoris.'  The  words  of  the  law  itself  are  more  full. 
*  ToUitur  autem  omnis  obligatio  solutione  ejus  quod  debetur; 
vel  siquis  consentiente  creditore  aliud  pro  alio  solverit ;  nee 
interest  quis  solverit,  utrum  ipse  qui  debet,  an  alius  pro  eo : 
liberatur  enim  et  alio  solvente,  sive  sciente,  sive  ignorante 
debitore,  vel  invito,  et  solutio  fiat.  Si  fide-jussor  solverit, 
non  enim  ipse  solus  liberatur,  sed  reus.'  So  that  there  is  no 
difference  in  the  law,  whether '  solutio'  be  *  ejusdem'  or  '  tan- 
tidem  ;'  and  this  is  the  case  in  the  things  that  are  '  ex  ma- 
leficio,  aut  quasi ;'  as  may  be  seen  at  large  in  the  commen- 
tators on  that  place. 

To  caution  all  men  against  the  poison  of  Antinomian 
doctrines,  now  so  strenuously  opposed  by  Mr.  Baxter,  and 
to  deliver  students  from  the  unhappy  model  of  theology, 
which  the  men  of  the  preceding  contests  have  entangled 
themselves  and  others  withal,  Mr.  B.  seriously  advises  them 
to  keep  in  their  minds,  and  carefully  to  distinguish  between 
the  will  of  God's  purpose,  and  his  precepts  or  law,  his  de- 
termining and  commanding  will,  in  the  first  place  ;  the  igno- 
rance whereof  it  seems,  confounded  the  theology  of  Doctor 
Twiss,  Pemble,  and  others. 

Nextly,  that  they  would  carefully  distinguish  between 
the  covenant  between  the  Father  and  the  Son  about  the  work 
of  his  mediation,  and  the  covenant  of  grace  and  mercy  con- 
firmed to  the  elect  in  his  blood. 

Now  if  these  two  distictions,  as  carefully  heeded,  and  as 
warily  observed  as  we  are  able,  will  prove  such  an  antidote 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  287 

against  the  infection,  for  my  part,  in  all  probability,  I  shall 
be  secure,  having  owned  them  ever  since  I  learned  my  ca- 
techism. 

Kai  Tuvrci  fABV  Si  ravra- 

And  so  am  I  dismissed.  This  may  perhaps  be  the  close 
of  this  controversy ;  if  otherwise,  I  am  indifferent ;  on  the 
one  side  it  will  be  so  :  I  delight  not  in  these  troubled  waters. 
If  I  must  engage  again  in  the  like  kind,  I  shall  pray  that  he 
from  whom  are  all  my  supplies,  would  give  me  a  real  humble 
frame  of  heart,  that  I  may  have  no  need  with  many  pre- 
tences, and  a  multitude  of  good  words,  to  make  a  cloak  for 
a  spirit  breaking  frequently  through  all  with  sad  discoveries 
of  pride  and  passion ;  and  to  keep  me  from  all  magisterial 
insolence,  pharisaical  supercilious  self-conceitedness,  con- 
tempt of  others,  and  every  thing  that  is  contrary  to  the  rule 
whereby  I  ought  to  walk. 

If  men  be  in  haste  to  oppose  what  I  have  delivered  about 
this  business,  let  them  (if  they  please,  I  have  no  authority  to 
prescribe  them  their  way)  speak  directly  to  the  purpose,  and 
oppose  that  which  is  affirmed,  and  answer  my  reasons  in  re- 
ference to  that  end  only  for  which  by  me  they  are  produced 
and  insisted  on. 

Because  I  see  some  men  have  a  desire  to  be  dealing  with 
me,  and  yet  know  not  well  what  to  fix  upon,  that  I  may  de- 
liver them  from  the  vanity  of  contending  with  their  own  sur- 
mises, and  if  it  be  possible,  to  prevail  with  them  to  speak 
closely,  clearly,  and  distinctly  to  the  matter  of  their  contests, 
and  not  mix  heterogeneous  things  in  the  same  discourse,  I 
will  briefly  shrive  myself  for  their  satisfaction. 

First,  then,  I  do  not  believe  that  any  man  is  actually  jus^ 
tified  from  eternity ;  because  of  that  of  the  apostle,  Rom. 
viii.  28 — 30.  but  yet  what  is  the  state  of  things,  in  reference 
to  the  economy  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  engaged 
in  from  eternity  for  the  salvation  of  sinners,  with  that  foun- 
tain union,  that  is  between  Christ  and  his  body  in  their  pre- 
destination, 1  shall  desire  a  little  more  time  to  deliver  my- 
self unto. 

2.  I  do  believe  that  there  was  a  covenant,  compact,  or 
agreement  between  Father  and  Son  for  the  salvation  of  the 
elect  by  his  mediation,  which,  upon  sin's  entering  into  the 
world,  had  an  efficacy  and  effect  of  the  very  same  nature 


288.  OF    THE    DEATH    OF    CHRIST, 

with  that,  which  it  hath  when  he  hath  actually  accomplished 
what  was  on  his  part  required  for  the  end  proposed  to  him ; 
and  that  therefore  in  the  Old  Testament  his  death  is  spoken 
of  sometimes  as  past,  Isa.  liii.  4 — 6.  and  that  to  make  this 
covenant  in  its  constitution  to  be  contemporary  to  its  revela- 
tion, or  the  promises  of  it  to  be  then  made  to  Christ,  when 
the  church  is  acquainted  that  those  promises  are  made,  is  a 
wide  mistake. 

But  under  what  consideration  the  elect  lie  unto  God, 
upon  the  transaction  of  this  original  covenant  with  the  Me- 
diator, I  desire  liberty  for  awhile  as  above. 

3.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  elect,  that  live  after  the 
death  of  Christ,  are  all  actually  in  their  own  persons  justified 
and  absolved  at  his  death  ;  because  '  the  wrath  of  God  abides 
on  men  that  believe  not ;'  John  iii.  36.  But  yet  what  to  the 
advantage  of  the  church  is  enwrapped  in  the  discharge  of 
their  great  representative,  who  died  in  their  stead  (for  that 
1  believe  also,  and  not  only  for  their  good)  I  desire  respite 
for  my  thoughts  as  formerly. 

4.  I  do  believe  that  Christ  underwent  the  very  same  pu- 
nishment for  us,  for  the  nature  and  kind  of  it,  which  we 
were  obnoxious  unto,  and  should  have  undergone,  had  not 
he  undertaken  for  us,  and  paid  the  idem  that  we  should  have 
done;  2  Cor.  v.  12.  Gal.  iii.  13. 

5.  I  believe  that  upon  the  death  of  Christ,  considering 
what  hath  been  said  before  concerning  the  compact  and 
agreement  between  God  and  the  Mediator,  about  that  matter, 
it  became  just  and  righteous,  with  reference  to  God's  justice, 
as  supreme  Governor  and  moderator  of  the  creatures,  and 
all  their  concernments,  that  those  for  whom  he  died,  should 
all  be  made  partakers  of  all  the  good  things,  which  Christ 
by  his  death  procured  for  them,  in  the  season  appointed  by 
the  sovereign  will  of  God.  But  that  this  right,  though  in- 
dissoluble, is  so  actually  vested  in  them,  as  to  be  actionable 
in  the  gospel  without  faith,  I  believe  not. 

6.  I  believe  that  all  spiritual  blessings,  mercies,  privi- 
leges whatever,  are  fruits  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  that  not- 
withstanding the  order  wherein  they  stand  one  to  another, 
they  all  depend  immediately  on  its  casuality  ;  though  '  re 
spectu  termini'  they  have  not  a  natural  immediation. 

7.  I  profess  that  we  are  absolved,  pardoned,  and  justified 


AND    OF    JUSTIFICATION.  289 

for  Christ's  sake,  and  therefore  that  Christ  is  reckoned  to 
us,  or  made  righteousness  to  us,  in  order  of  nature  antece- 
dently to  all  those  things,  which  for  his  sake  we  do  receive, 
and  are  made  partakers  of  with  and  by  him,  &c. 

For  a  close  of  all,  I  must  profess,  that  I  will  not  con- 
tend with  any  man,  who  discovers  in  himself  such  a  resolu- 
tion ^emv  Sta^uAaVrtti',  that  if  he  be  pressed,  rather  than  let 
it  go,  he  will  go  backward,  and  attempt  aKtvrjra  Kiveiv,  and  to 
question  common  received  principles  ;  knowing  the  multi- 
tude of  errors  and  abominations  that  the  church  of  God 
hath  been  pestered  withal  by  men  of  this  principle  and  prac- 
tice. Hence  are  the  beginnings  of  men  modest,  but  their 
endings  desperate  :  hence  is  Arminianism  ended  in  Episco- 
pianism  ;  and  Arianism  in  Socinianism,  and  in  many,  Soci- 
nianism  in  Mahoraetanism  and  Atheism.  If  I  find  this  reso- 
lution and  spirit  in  any  man,  he  shall  rather  enjoy  his  own 
present  conceits,  than  by  me  be  precipitated  into  worse 
abominations.  Nor  shall  I  (the  Lord  assisting)  be  unmind- 
ful of  that  of  the  apostle,  1  Tim.  vi.  3 — 5.  Ei  ng  iTepoSidaa- 
koAeT,  KOI  jU))  TTpoaipy^iTai  vyiaivovai  \6yoig  roig  tov  Kvpiov 
■t]f.Ui}v'\r\(TOv  ')(jpLGrov,  koi  ry  kut  ivari^deiav  oicaaKoXia,  TeTVipwrai, 
jUTjSli/  iTTiaTaiatvoQ,  dXXa  voau)V  TTtpt  Zr}T{}(THg  koX  XoyojUa;)^tac, 
t^  S)v  yivsrai  (p^ovog,  £pfC>  jSAacr^rj/xtat,  imovoiai  TTOVipax,  ira- 
()«Smrptj3ai,  8cc.  as  also  that  of  the  same  apostle,  Tit.  iii.  9. 
MtDjOac  Se  (^riTi](TEig,  koX  yeveaXojiag,  koX  tpftc.  koi  fia^ag  vo- 
mXag  TrepucTTaao'  elaX  jap  d\iw<f)£\£'ig  koX  fxaraioi.  If  I  must 
contend  with  any,  as  I  am  resolved  for  the  matter  Trport/xav 
Tt)v  d\i}^£iav,  so  for  the  manner  of  handling  it,  it  shall  not  be 
my  endeavour  to  cloud  and  darken  things  easy,  trite,  com- 
mon in  themselves,  with  new,  dark,  artificial  expressions, 
but  rather  to  give  plainness  and  perspicuity  to  things  hard 
and  difficult,  confirming  them  with  the  authority  of  Scrip- 
ture, opened  by  the  import  of  the  words  insisted  on,  and  de- 
sign of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  their  contexture.  Nor  will  I  con- 
tend with  any,  whose  motto  is  that  of  him  in  Piautus ;  '  dicat 
quod  quisque  vult,  ego  de  hac  sententia  non  dimovebor :'  or 
that  hath  thoughts  of  his  own  notions,  like  those  of  him  in 
Nsevius,  who  cried  out, '  primum  quod  dicebo  recte,  secun- 
dum quod  dicebo  eo  melius.'  And  as  my  aim  is  to  know 
Christ  and  him  crucified,  to  exalt  him,  and  ascribe  to  him 
the  pre-eminence  in  all  things,  to  discover  the  whole  of  our 


290       OF  THE  DEATH  OF  CHRIST,  &C. 

salvation,  and  glory  of  God  thereby,  centered  in  his  person 
and  mediation,  with  its  emanation  from  thence,  through  the 
efficacy  of  the  eternal  Spirit,  and  all  our  obedience  to  re- 
ceive life,  power,  and  vigour  from  thence  only,  knowing  that 
it  is  the  obedience  of  faith,  and  hath  its  foundation  in  blood 
and  water  ;  so  I  equally  abhor  all  doctrines  that  would  take 
self  out  of  the  dust,  make  something  of  that  which  is  worse 
than  nothing,  and  spin  out  matter  for  a  web  of  peace  and  con- 
solation from  our  own  bowels,  by  resolving  our  acceptation 
with  God  into  any  thing  in  ourselves ;  and  those,  that  by 
any  means  would  intercept  the  efficacy  of  the  death  and  cross 
of  Christ  from  its  work  of  perpetual  and  constant  mortifica- 
tion in  the  hearts  of  believers  ;  or  cut  off  any  obligation  unto 
obedience  or  holiness,  that  by  the  discovery  of  the  will  of 
God,  either  in  the  law  or  gospel,  is  put  upon  the  redeemed 
ones  of  the  Lord. 

Tag  dl  fxu)pag  Ka\  cnraidevTOvg  titiTi'iaeig  wapaiTOV,   ddwg  on 
-ytvvwfft  fxa)(ag'  2  Tim.  ii.  23. 


A  REVIEW 


ANNOTATIONS  OF  HUGO  GROTIUS, 


IN    REFERENCE    UNTO 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  THE  DEITY  AND  SATISFACTION  OF  CHRIST 


A  DEFENCE  OF  THE  CHARGE  FORMERLY   LAID  AGAINST  THKM. 


A 
SECOND  CONSIDERATION 

OF    THE 

ANNOTATIONS  OF  HUGO  GROTIUS. 


Having  in  my  late  defence  of  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel, 
from  the  corruptions  of  the  Socinians,  been  occasioned  to 
vindicate  the  testimonies  given  in  the  Scripture  to  the  Deity 
of  Christ,  from  their  exceptions,  and  finding  that  Hugo  Gro- 
tius,  in  his  Annotations,  had  (for  the  most  part)  done  the 
same  things  with  them,  as  to  that  particular,  and  some  other 
important  articles  of  the  Christian  faith,  that  book  of  his 
being  more  frequent  in  the  hands  of  students,  than  those  of 
the  Socinians,  I  thought  it  incumbent  on  me,  to  do  the  same 
work  in  reference  to  those  Annotations,  which  it  was  my  de- 
sign to  perform  towards  the  writings  of  Socinus,  Smalcius, 
and  their  companions  and  followers.  What  I  have  been 
enabled  to  accomplish  by  that  endeavour,  with  what  service 
to  the  gospel  hath  been  performed  thereby,  is  left  to  the 
judgment  of  them  who  desire  dXn^eveiv  Iv  dyairr].  Of  my 
dealing  with  Grotius  I  gave  a  brief  account  in  my  epistle  to 
the  governors  of  the  university,  and  that  with  reference  to 
an  apology  made  for  him,  not  long  before.  This  hath  ob- 
tained a  new  apology  under  the  name  of  a  Second  Defence 
of  Hugo  Grotius  ;  with  what  little  advantage  either  to  the 
repute  of  Grotius,  as  to  the  thing  in  question,  or  of  the 
apologist  himself,  it  is  judged  necessary  to  give  the  ensuing 
account :  for  which  I  took  the  first  leisure  hour  I  could  ob- 
tain, having  things  of  greater  weight,  daily  incumbent  on 
me.  The  only  thing  of  importance  by  me  charged  on  those 
Annotations  of  Grotius,  was  this ;  that  the  texts  of  Scripture 
both  in  the  Old  Testament  and  New,  bearing  witness  to  the 
Deity  and  satisfaction  of  Christ,  are  in  them  wrested  to 
other  senses  and  significations,  and  the  testimonies  given  to 
those  grand  truths,  thereby  eluded.  Of  those  of  the  first 
kind  I  excepted  one,  yet  with  some  doubt,  lest  his  expres- 


294  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

sions  therein,  ought  to  be  interpreted  according  to  the  ana- 
logy of  what  he  had  elsewhere  delivered  :  of  which  afterward. 

Because  that  which  concerns  the  satisfaction  of  Christ 
will  admit  of  the  easiest  despatch,  though  taking  up  most 
room,  I  shall  in  the  first  place  insist  thereon.  The  words  of 
my  charge  on  the  Annotations,  as  to  this  head  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Scripture  are  these.  The  condition  of  these  fa- 
mous Annotations  as  to  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  is  the  same. 
Not  one  text  in  the  whole  Scripture,  wherein  testimony  is 
given  to  that  sacred  truth,  which  is  not  wrested  to  another 
sense,  or  at  least  the  doctrine  in  it,  concealed  and  obscured 
by  them. 

This  being  a  matter  of  fact,  and  the  words  containing  a 
crime  charged  on  the  Annotations,  he  that  will  make  a  de- 
fence of  them,  must  either  disprove  the  assertion  by  in- 
stances to  the  contrary,  or  else  granting  the  matter  of  fact, 
evince  it  to  be  no  crime.  That  which  is  objected  in  matter 
of  fact,  'aut  negandura  est  aut  defendendum,'  says  Quin- 
tilian  :  lib.  5.  cap.  de  Refut.  and  '  extra  hsec  in  judiciis  fere 
nihil  est.'  In  other  cases,  '  patronus,  neget,  defendat,  trans- 
ferat,  excuset,  deprecetur,  molliat,  minuat,  avertat,  despiciat, 
derideat;'  but  in  matters  of  fact,  the  two  first  only  have 
place.  Aristotle  allows  more  particulars  for  an  apologist 
to  divert  unto,  if  the  matter  require  it:  he  may  say  of  what 
is  objected,  r}  ojg  ovk  lariv,  ?';,  wg  ov  )3Aa|3fpov,  ?'}  ov  tovtm,  rj 
(jjg  ov  TriXiKOVTO,  i]  owk  adiKov,  ?'}  ov  fxiya,  ?)  ovk  aia^pov,  77  ouic 
iX^v  fiiytOoc.  (Rhet.  lib.  iii.  cap.  15.)  all  which  in  a  plain 
matter  of  fact  may  be  reduced  to  the  former  heads.  That 
any  other  apology  can  or  ought  to  take  place  in  this,  or  any 
matter  of  the  same  importance,  will  not  easily  be  proved. 
The  present  apologist  takes  another  course.  Such  ordinary 
paths  are  not  for  him  to  walk  in.  He  tells  us  of  the  excel- 
lent book  that  Grotius  wrote  *  de  Satisfactione  Christi,'  and 
the  exposition  of  sundry  places  of  Scripture,  especially  of 
divers  verses  of  Isa.  liii.  given  therein  ;  and  then  adds  sundry 
inducements  to  persuade  us,  that  he  was  of  the  same  mind 
in  his  Annotations.  And  this  is  called  a  defence  of  Grotius. 
The  apologist,  I  suppose,  knows  full  well,  what  texts  of 
Scripture  they  are,  that  are  constantly  pleaded  for  the  sa- 
tisfaction of  Christ,  by  them  who  do  believe  that  doctrine. 
I  shall  also  for  once  take  it  for  granted,  that  he  might  with- 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  295 

out  much  difficulty,  have  obtained  a  sight  of  Grotius's  An- 
notations ;  to  which  I  shall  only  add,  that  probably  if  he 
could  from  them  have  disproved  the  assertion  before-men- 
tioned, by  any  considerable  instances,  he  is  not  so  tender 
of  the  prefacers  credit,  as  to  have  concealed  it  on  any  such 
account.  But  the  severals  of  his  plea  for  the  Annotations 
in  this  particular,  I  am  persuaded  are  accounted  by  some, 
worthy  consideration  ;  a  brief  view  of  them  will  suffice. 

The  signal  place  of  Isa  liii.  he  tells  us,  he  hath  heard 
taken  notice  of  by  some  (I  thought  it  had  been  probable 
the  apologist  might  have  taken  notice  of  it  himself),  as  that 
wherein  his  Annotations  are  most  suspected ;  therefore  on 
that  he  will  fasten  awhile.  Who  would  not  now  expect  that 
the  apologist  should  have  entered  upon  the  consideration  of 
those  Annotations,  and  vindicated  them  from  the  imputations 
insinuated  :  but  he  knew  a  better  way  of  procedure,  and  who 
shall  prescribe  to  him,  what  suits  his  purpose  and  proposal  ? 

This,  I  say,  is  the  instance  chosen  to  be  insisted  on  ;  and 
the  vindication  of  the  Annotations  therein,  by  the  interpre- 
tation given  in  their  author's  book  '  de  Satisfactione  Christi' 
is  proposed  to  consideration.  That  others,  if  not  the  apo- 
logist himself,  may  take  notice  of  the  emptiness  of  such  pre- 
cipitate apologies,  as  are  ready  to  be  tumbled  out,  without 
due  digestion  or  consideration,  I  shall  not  only  compare  the 
Annotations  and  that  book  as  to  the  particular  place  pro- 
posed, and  manifest  the  inconsistency  of  the  one  with  the 
other ;  but  also  to  discover  the  extreme  negligence  and  confi- 
dence, which  lie  at  the  bottom  of  his  following  attempt,  to  in- 
duce a  persuasion,  that  the  judgment  of  the  man  of  whom  we 
speak,  was  not  altered  (that  is,  as  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  relating  to  the  satisfaction  of  Christ),  nor  is  others 
[different]  in  his  Annotations,  than  in  that  book ;  I  shall  com- 
pare the  one  with  the  other,  by  sundry  other  instances,  and 
let  the  world  see  how  in  the  most  important  places  contested 
about,  he  hath  utterly  deserted  the  interpretations  given  of 
them  by  himself  in  his  book  *  de  Satisfactione,'  and  directly 
taken  up  that  which  he  did  oppose. 

The  apologist  binds  me  in  the  first  place  to  that  of  Isa. 
liii.  which  is  ushered  in  by  the  1  Pet.  ii.  24. 

From  1  Pet.  ii.  9A.  (says  the  apologist)  Grotius  informs 


296  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

US,  *  that  Christ  so  bare  our  sins,  that  he  freed  us  from  them, 
so  that  we  are  healed  by  his  stripes.' 

This,  thus  crudely  proposed,  Socinus  himself  would  grant 
it,  is  little  more  than  barely  repeating  the  words  ;  Grotius 
goes  farther,  and  contends  that  dvi)vijK£v  the  word  there 
used  by  the  apostle,  is  to  be  interpreted,  '  tulit  sursum 
eundo,  portavit,'and  tells  us  that  Socinus  would  render  this 
word  '  abstulit,'  and  so  take  away  the  force  of  the  argument 
from  this  place.  To  disprove  that  insinuation,  he  urges 
sundry  other  places  in  the  New  Testament,  where  some 
words  of  the  same  importance  are  used,  and  are  no  way  ca- 
pable of  such  a  signification.  And  whereas  Socinus  urges 
to  the  contrary,  Heb.  ix.  28.  where  he  says  avr^vejKHv  afxap- 
riaq  signifies  nothing  but '  auferre  peccata,'  Grotius  disproves 
that  instance,  and  manifests  that  in  that  place  also  it  is  to  be 
rendered  by  '  tulit,'  and  so  relates  to  the  death  of  Christ. 

That  we  may  put  this  instance  given  us  by  the  apologist, 
to  vindicate  the  Annotations  from  the  crime  charged  on  them 
to  an  issue,  I  shall  give  the  reader  the  words  of  his  Annota- 
tions on  that  place  :  it  is  as  follows : 

Oc  Tag  ajiapTLaq  rjfxwv  aitrog  avr^veyKtv,  &.C.]  avijViyKtv  '  hie 
est,  abstulit,  quod  sequentia  ostendunt,  quomodo  idem  ver- 
bum  sumi  notavimus,'  Heb.  ix,  28.  '  eodem  sensu'  aipsi  afxap- 
Tiav,  .Tolin  i.  29.  et  ^W1  et  ^no  Isa.  liii.  4.  '  ubi  Grseci'  ^ipu' 
'  vitia  nostra  ita  interfecit,  sicut  qui  cruci  affiguntur  interfici 
Solent.  Simile  loquendi  genus.  Col.  ii.  14.  vide  Rom.  vi.  6. 
Gal,  ii.  20.  24.  'est  autem  hie /ufTaXrj^ptC ;  non  enim  proprie 
Christus  cum  crucifigeretur,  vitia  nostra  abstulit.  Sed  causas 
dedit  per  quas  auferrerentur.  Nam  crux  Christi  fundamen- 
tum  est  praedicationis  ;  prcedicatio  vero  pcenitentiae,  pceni- 
tentia  vero  aufert  vitia.' 

How  well  the  annotator  abides  here  by  his  former  inter- 
pretation of  this  place,  the 'apologist  may  easily  discover  : 
1.  There  he  contends  that  av/jvjyice  is  as  much  as  'tulit,'  or 
*  sursum  tulit:'  and  objects  out  of  Socinus,  that  it  must  be 
'  abstulit,'  which  quite  alters  the  sense  of  the  testimony. 
Here  he  contends  with  him,  that  it  must  be  '  abstulit.'  2. 
There,  Heb.  ix.  28.  is  of  the  same  importance  with  this 
1  Pet.  ii.  24.  as  there  interpreted  :  here,  as  here;  that  is  in 
a  quite  contrary  sense,   altogether   inconsistent  with  the 


OF     HUGO     GROTIUS.  297 

Other.  3.  For  company  ^:id  used  Isa.  liii.  is  called  into 
the  same  signification,  which  in  the  book  '  de  Satisfactione,* 
he  contends  is  never  used  in  that  sense,  and  that  most  truly. 
4.  Upon  this  exposition  of  the  words,  he  gives  the  very 
sense  contended  for  by  the  Socinians ;  '  non  enim  propria 
Christus  cum  crucifigeretur  vitia  nostra  abstulit,  sed  causTis 
dedit  per  quas  auferrerentur :'  what  are  these  causes ;  he 
adds  them  immediately,  '  Nam  crux  Christi  fundamentum 
est  prsedicationis,  prffidicatio  vero  poenitentias,  poenitentia 
vero  aufert  vitia.'  He  that  sees  not  the  whole  Socinian  poison 
wrapped  up  and  proposed  in  this  interpretation,  is  ignorant 
of  the  state  of  the  difference  as  to  that  head,  between  them 
and  Christians.  5.  To  make  it  a  little  more  evident,  how 
constant  the  annotator  was  to  his  first  principles,  which  he 
insisted  on  in  the  management  of  his  disputes  with  Socinus 
about  the  sense  of  this  place,  I  shall  add  the  words  of  So- 
cinus himself,  which  then  he  did  oppose.  '  Verum  animad- 
vertere  oportet  prim  am  in  Gre3eco,  verbum,  quod  interpretes 
verterunt  pertulit,  est  avr\vzyKHv,  quod  non  pertulit  sed  ab- 
stulit vertendum  erat,  non  secus  ac  factum  fuerit  in  epistola 
ad  Hebreeos,  cap.  ix.  28.  ubi  idem  legend!  modus  habetur, 
unde  constat  av-nvtyKHv  ai.iapTiag  non  perferre  peccata,  sed 
peccata  tollere;  sive  auferre,  significare.'  Socin.  de  Jes. 
Christ.  Serv.  lib.  2.  cap.  6. 

What  difference  there  is  between  the  design  of  the  anno- 
tator, and  that  of  Socinus,  what  compliance  in  the  quotation 
of  the  parallel  place  of  the  Hebrews,  what  direct  opposition 
and  head  is  made  in  the  Annotations  against  that  book  '  de 
Satisfactione,'  and  how  clearly  the  cause  contended  for  in 
the  one,  is  given  away  in  the  other;  needs  no  farther  to  be 
demonstrated.  But  if  this  instance  makes  not  good  the 
apologist's  assertion,  it  may  be  supposed  that  that  which 
follows,  which  k  ushered  in  by  this,  will  do  it  to  the  purpose; 
let  then  that  come  into  consideration. 

This  is  that  of  Isa.  liii.  Somewhat  of  the  sense  which 
Grotius  in  his  book  *  de  Satisfactione'  contends  for  in  this 
place,  is  given  us  by  the  apologist. 

The  eleventh  verse  of  the  chapter  which  he  first  considers 
(in  my  book)p.  14,  he  thus  proposes  and  expounds:  'justi- 
ficabit  servus  mens  Justus  multos  et  iniquitates  ipsorum  ha- 
julabit,  in  Heb.  est:'  ';nD'  «in  Oniiyi  vox  autem  pjr  iniqui 

VOL.     IX.  X 


298  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

tatem  eignificat,  atque  etiam  iniquitatis  pcenam,  2  Heg*.  vii.  9. 
vox  autera  b2D  est  sustinere,  bajulare,  quoties  autem  baju- 
lare  ponitur  cum  nomine  peccati  aut  iniquitatis,  id  in  omni 
lingua  et  maxime  in  Hebraismo  significat  posnas  ferre,'  with 
much  more  to  this  purpose.  The  whole  design  of  the  main 
dispute  in  that  place,  is,  from  that  discourse  of  the  prophet 
to  prove,  that  Jesus  Christ  'properly  underwent  the  punish- 
ment due  to  our  sins,  and  thereby  made  satisfaction  to  God 
for  them.' 

To  manifest  his  constancy  to  this  doctrine,  in  his  Anno- 
tations he  gives  such  an  exposition  of  that  whole  chapter  of 
Isa.  liii.  as  is  manifestly  and  universally  inconsistent  with 
any  such  design  in  the  words,  as  that  which  he  intends  to 
prove  from  them  in  his  book  'de  Satisfactione.'  In  parti- 
cular (to  give  one  instance  of  this  assertion)  he  contends 
here  that  ^2D,  is  as  much  as  'bajulare,  portare,'  and  that 
joined  with  'iniquity' (in  all  languages,  especially  in  the  He- 
brew), that  phrase  of'  bearing  iniquity,'  signifies  to  undergo 
the  punishment  due  to  it ;  in  his  Annotations  on  the  place, 
as  also  in  those  on  1  Pet.  ii.  24.  he  tells  you  the  word  signi- 
fies *  auferre,'  which  with  all  his  strength  he  had  contended 
against.  Not  to  draw  out  this  particular  instance  into  any 
greater  length,  I  make  bold  to  tell  the  apologist  (what  I 
suppose  he  knows  not),  that  there  is  no  one  verse  of  the 
whole  chapter,  so  interpreted  in  his  Annotations,  as  that  the 
sense  given  by  him,  is  consistent  with,  nay  is  not  repugnant 
to,  that  which  from  the  same  verses  he  pleads  for  in  his 
book  'de  Satisfactione  Christi.'  If  notwithstanding  this  in- 
formation, the  apologist  be  not  satisfied,  let  him  if  he  please 
consider  what  I  have  already  animadverted  on  those  Anno- 
tations, and  undertake  their  vindication.  These  loose  dis- 
courses are  not  at  all  to  the  purpose  in  hand,  nor  the  ques- 
tion between  us,  which  is  solely,  whether  Grotius  in  his  An- 
notations have  not  perverted  the  sense  of  those  texts  of 
Scripture,  which  are  commonly  and  most  righteously  pleaded 
as  testimonies  given  to  the  satisfaction  of  Christ.  But  as 
to  this  particular  place  of  Isaiah,  the  apologist  hath  a  farther 
plea,  the  sum  whereof  (not  to  trouble  the  reader  with  the  re- 
petition of  a  discourse  so  little  to  the  purpose)  comes  to  this 
head  ;  that  Grotius  in  his  book  '  de  Satisfactione  Christi,' 
gives  the  mystical  sense  of  the  chapter,  under  which  consi- 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  299 

-deration,  it  belongs  to  Christ  and  his  sufferings  ;  in  his 
Annotations  the  literal,  which  had  its  immediate  completion 
in  Jeremiah,  which  was  not  so  easily  discoverable  or  vulgarly 
taken  notice  of.  This  is  the  sura  of  his  first  observation  on 
this  place,  to  acquit  the  annotator  of  the  crime  charged  upon 
him.  Whether  he  approve  the  application  of  the  prophecy 
to  Jeremiah  or  no,  I  know  not.  He  says,  Grotius  so  con- 
ceived. The  design  of  the  discourse  seems  to  give  approba- 
tion to  that  conception.  How  the  literal  sense  of  a  place 
should  come  to  be  less  easily  discovered  than  the  mystical, 
well  I  know  not.  Nor  shall  I  speak  of  the  thing  itself  con- 
cerning the  literal  and  mystical  sense  supposed  to  be  in  the 
same  place  and  words  of  Scripture,  with  the  application  of 
the  distinction  to  those  prophecies  which  have  a  double  ac- 
complishment in  the  type  and  thing  or  person  typified  (which 
yet  hath  no  soundness  in  it),  but  to  keep  to  the  matter  now 
in  hand,  I  shall  make  bold  for  the  removal  of  this  eno-ine 
applied  by  the  apologist,  for  the  preventing  all  possible  mis- 
take, or  controversy  about  the  annotator's  after-charge  in 
this  matter,  to  tell  him,  that  the  perverting  of  the  first  lite- 
ral sense  of  the  chapter,  or  giving  it  a  completion  in  any 
person  whatsoever,  in  a  first,  second,  or  third  sense,  but  the 
Son  of  God  himself,  is  no  less  than  blasphemy ;  which  the 
annotator  is  no  otherwise  freed  from,  but  by  his  conceiving 
a  sense  to  be  in  the  words,  contrary  to  their  literal  import- 
ance, and  utterly  exclusive  of  the  concernment  of  Jesus 
Christ  in  them.  If  the  apologist  be  otherwise  minded,  1 
shall  not  invite  him  again  to  the  consideration  of  what  I  have 
already  written  in  the  vindication  of  the  whole  prophecy 
from  the  wretched  corrupt  interpretation  of  the  annotator 
(not  hoping  that  he  will  be  able  to  break  through  that  dis- 
couragement he  hath  from  looking  into  that  treatise,  by  the 
prospect  he  hath  taken  of  the  whole  by  the  epistle),  but  do 
express  my  earnest  desire,  that  by  an  exposition  of  the  se- 
verals  of  that  chapter,  and  their  application  to  any  other 
(nor  by  loose  discourses  foreign  to  the  question  in  hand), 
he  would  endeavour  to  evince  the  contrary ;  if  on  second 
thoughts  he  find  either  his  judgment  or  ability  not  ready  or 
competent  for  such  an  attempt,  I  heartily  wish  he  would  be 
careful  hereafter  of  ingenerating  apprehensions  of  that  na- 
ture in  the  minds  of  others,  by  any  such  discourses  as  this. 

X  2 


300  A    llEVIEM^    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

I  cannot  but  suppose  that  I  am  already  absolved  from  a  ^ 
necessity  of  any  farther  procedure,  as  to  the  justifying  my 
charge  against  the  Annotations,  having  sufficiently  foiled  the 
instance  produced  by  the  apologist  for  the  weakening  of  it. 
But  yet  lest  any  should  think,  that  the  present  issue  of  this 
debate,  is  built  upon  some  unhappiness  of  the  apologist  in 
the  choice  of  the  particulars  insisted  on  ;  which  might  have 
been  prevented,  or  may  yet  be  removed,  by  the  production 
of  other  instances  ;  I  shall  for  their  farther  satisfaction,  pre- 
sent them  with  sundry  other,  the  most  important  testimonies 
given  to  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  wherein  the  annotator 
hath  openly  prevaricated,  and  doth  embrace  and  propose 
those  very  interpretations,  and  that  very  sense,  which  in  his 
book,*de  SatisfactioneChristi,'  he  had  strenuously  opposed. 

Page  8,  of  his  book  '  de  Satisfactione,'  he  pleads  the  sa- 
tisfaction of  Christ,  from  Gal.  ii.  21.  laying  weight  on  this, 
that  the  word  dojpeav,  signifies  the  want  of  an  antecedent 
cause,  on  the  supposition  there  made.  In  his  Annotations 
he  deserts  this  assertion,  and  takes  up  the  sense  of  the  place 
given  by  Socinus, '  de  Servatore,'  lib.  2.  cap.  24.  His  departure 
into  the  tents  of  Socinus  on  Gal.  iii.  13.  is  much  more  per- 
nicious, p.  25 — 27.  urging  that  place  and  vindicating  it  from 
the  exceptions  of  Socinus,  he  concludes,  that  the  apostle 
said  Ciirist  was  made  a  curse  ;  *  quasi  dixerit  Christum  fac- 
tum esse  Tfo  9faJ  liriKaTapaTov  :  hoc  est  pcense  a  Deo  irro- 
o-atEB,  et  quidem  ignominiosissimae  obnoxium.'  To  make 
good  this,  in  his  Annotations,  he  thus  expounds  the  words  ; 
*  duplex  hie  figura;  nam  et  Karapa  pro  KardpaTog,  quomodo 
circumcisio  pro  circumcisis  :  et  subauditur  a»c  '■  nam  Chris- 
tus  ita  cruciatus  est,  quasi  esset  Deo  KaTaparog,  quo  nihil 
horaini  pessimo  in  hac  vita  pejus  evenire  poterat;'  which  is 
the  very  interpretation  of  the  words  given  by  Socinus  which 
he  opposed  ;  and  the  same  that  Crellius  insists  upon  in  his 
vindication  of  Socinus  against  him.  So  uniform  was  the 
judgment  of  the  annotator,  with  that  of  the  author  of  the 
book  '  de  Satisfactione  Christi.' 

Pages  32,  33,  &c.  are  spent  in  the  exposition  and  vindi- 
cation of  Rom.  iii.  25,  26.  that  expression  hq  tvdei^iv  Trjg  Si- 
Kaioavvnc  avrov,  manifesting  the  end  of  the  suffering  of 
Christ,  is  by  him  chiefly  insisted  on.  Tiiat  by  diKaioavvr)  is 
there  intended  that  justice  of  God,  v^hereby  he  punisheth 


OF    HUGO    G110TIU8.  301 

sin,  he  contends  and  proves  from  the  nature  of  the  thing 
itself,  and  comparing  the  expression  with  other  parallel  texts 
of  Scripture  ;  Socinus  had  interpreted  this  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  Christ's  fidelity  and  veracity, lib.  2.  'de  Servatore/ 
cap.  2.  (ut  ostenderet  se  veracem  et  fidelem  esse) ;'  but  Crel- 
lius  in  his  vindication  of  him,  places  it  rather  on  the  good- 
ness and  liberality  of  God  ;  which  is,  saith  he,  the  righteous- 
ness there  intended.  To  make  good  his  ground,  the  anno- 
tator  thus  expounds  the  meaning  of  the  words;  'vocem 
StKotoo-uvr/c  malim  hie  de  bonitate  interpretari,  quam  de  fide 
in  promissis  preestandis,  quia  quge  sequuntur  non  ad  Judseos 
solos  pertinent,  sed  etiam  ad  gentes,  quibus  promissio  nulla 
facta  erat.'  He  rather  (he  tells  you)  embraces  the  inter- 
pretation of  Crellius  than  of  Socinus  ;  but  for  that  which 
himself  had  contended  for,  it  is  quite  shut  out  of  doors  ;  as 
I  have  elsewhere  manifested  at  large. 

The  same  course  he  takes  with  Rom.  v.  10.  which  he  in- 
sists on  p.  26.  and  2  Cor.  v.  18 — 21.  concerning  which  he 
openly  deserts  his  own  former  interpretation,  and  closes  ex- 
pressly with  that  which  he  had  opposed,  as  he  doth  in  re- 
ference to  all  other  places  where  any  mention  is  made  of 
reconciliation  ;  the  substance  of  his  annotations  on  those 
places,  seeming  to  be  taken- out  of  Socinus,  Crellius,  and 
some  others  of  that  party. 

That  signal  place  of  Heb.  ii.  17.  in  this  kind,  deserves 
particularly  to  be  taken  notice  of;  cap.  7.  p.  141.  of  his 
book  *  de  Satisfactione,'  he  pleads  the  sense  of  that  expres- 
sion, dg  TO  IXaaKtrr^ai  Tag  afxa^Tiag  tov  \aov,  to  be  WaaKta^ai 
Qihv  TTfpt  Twv  afxuQTiCov  :  and  adds,  *  significat  ergo  ibi  ex- 
piationem  quce  fit  placando  :'  But  Crellius's  defence  of  Soci- 
nus had  so  possessed  the  man's  mind  before  he  came  to 
write  his  Annotations,  that  on  that  place  he  gives  us  di- 
rectly his  sense,  and  almost  his  words,  in  a  full  opposition  to 
what  he  had  before  asserted  :  iXaaKia^ai  a^apTiag,  '  hoc  qui- 
dem  loco,  ut  ex  sequentibus  apparet,  est  auferre  peccata, 
sive  purgare  a  peccato,  id  est,  efficere  ne  peccetur,  vires  sup- 
peditando  pro  modo  tentationum.'  So  the  annotator  on  that 
place ;  endeavouring  farther  to  prove  his  interpretation. 
From  Rom.  iv.  last,  cap.  i.  p.  47.  of  his  book  '  de  Satisfac- 
tione,' he  clearly  proves  the  satisfaction  of  Christ ;  and 
evinces  that  to  be  the  sense  of  that  expression,  '  traditus 


302  A     REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

propter  peccata  nostra ,'  which  he  thus  comments  on  in  his 
Annotations;  'poterat  dicere  qui  et  mortuus  est,  et  resur- 
rexit  ut  nos  a  peccatis  justificaret,  id  est,  liberaret.     Sed 
amans    dvriOtTa  morti   conjunxit  peccata,   quae  sunt  mors 
animi,  resurrectioni   autem   adeptionem  justitiae,   quse    est 
animi  resuscitatio  :  mire  nos  et  a  peccatis  retrahit  etadjus- 
titiam  ducit :  quod  videmus  Christum  mortem  non  formi- 
dasse  pro  doctrina  sua  peccatis  contraria,  et  ad  justitiamnos 
vocanti  testinionio  ;  et  a  Deo  suscitatum,  ut  eidera  doctrina) 
summa  conciliaretur  authoritas.'     He    that   sees  not,   not 
only  that  he  directly  closes  in  with  what  before  he   had  op- 
posed, but  also,  that  he  hath  here  couched  the  whole   doc- 
trine of  the  Socinians,  about  the  mediation  of  Christ  and 
our  justification  thereby,  is  utterly  ignorant  of  the  state  of 
the  controversy  between  them  and  Christians, 

I  suppose  it  will  not  be  thought  necessary  for  me  to  pro- 
ceed with  the  comparison  instituted.     The  several  books  are 
in  the  hands  of  most  students,  and  that  the  case  is  generally 
the  same  in  the  other  places  pleaded  for  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ,  they  may  easily  satisfy  themselves.     Only  because 
the  apologist  seems  to  put  some  difference  between  his  An- 
notations on  the  Revelations  (as  having  received  their  linea- 
ments and  colours  from  his  own  pencil),  and  those  on  the 
Epistles  which  he  had  not  so  completed ;  as  I  have  already 
■manifested,  that  in  his  Annotations  on  that  book,  he  hath 
treacherously  tampered  with,  and  corrupted  the  testimonies 
given  to  the  Deity  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  so  shall  I  give  one 
instance  from  them  also,  of  his  dealing  no  less  unworthily 
with  those  that  concern  his  satisfaction. 

Socinus  in  his  second  book  against  Covet,  second  part, 
and  chap.  17.  gives  us  this  account  of  those  words  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  Rev.  i.  5.  '  who  hath  loved  us,  and  washed  us 
in  his  own  blood  :  Johannes  in  Apocalyp.  chap.  i.  5.  alia 
metaphora  seu  translatione  (quse  nihil  aliud  est  quam  com- 
pendiosa  qusedam  comparatio),  utens,  dixit  de  Christo  et 
ejus  morte,  qui  dilexit  nos  et  lavit  nos  a  peccatis  in  san- 
guine suoj  nam  quemadmodum  aqua  abluuntur  sordes  cor- 
poris, sic  sanguine  Chrisli,  peccata,  quae  sordes  animi  sunt 
absterguntur.  Absterguntur,  inquam,  quia  animus  noster 
ab  ipsis  mundatur,'  &c.  This  interpretation  is  opposed  and 
exploded  by  Grotius, lib.  'de  Satis.' c.  10.  pp.  208,  209.  The 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  303 

substance  of  it  being,  that  Christ  washed  us  from  our  sins 
by  his  death,  in  that  he  confirmed  his  doctrine  of  repent- 
ance and  newness  of  Hfe  thereby,  by  which  we  are  turned 
from  our  sins;  as  he  manifests  in  the  close  of  his  discourse: 

*  hoc  saBpius  urgendum  est,'  saith  Socinus,  '  Jesum  Christum 
ea  ratione  peccata  nostra  abstulisse,  quod  efFecerit,  ut  a  pec- 
cando  desistamus.'  This  interpretation  of  Socinus,  being 
reinforced  by  Crellius,  the  place  falls  again  under  the  con- 
sideration of  Grotius,  in  those  Annotations  on  the  Revela- 
tions ;  which  as  the  apologist  tell  us,  received  their  very 
lineaments  and  colours  from  his  own  pencil.  There  then 
he  gives  us  this  account  thereof,  koX  Xovcravn  rj/xag  aTrb  rwv 
afxapTiCiv  rifiMv  Iv  t(^  alfiaTL  avrov'  '  Sanguine  suo,  id  est,  morte 
tolerata,  certos  nos  reddidit  veritatis  eorum  quae  docuerat, 
quse  talia  sunt,  ut  nihil  sit  aptius  ad  purgandos  a  vitiis  ani- 
mos.  Humidae  naturae,  sub  qua  est  sanguis,  proprium  est 
lavare.  Id  vero  peregregiam  aXXrj-yoptav  ad  animum  trans- 
fertur.  Dicitur  autem  Christus  suo  sanguine  nos  lavisse, 
quia  et  ipse  omnia  praestitit  quae  ad  id  requirebantur  et  ap- 
paret  secutum  in  plurimis  efFectum.'  I  desire  the. apologist 
to  tell  me  what  he  thinks  of  this  piece  thus  perfected,  with 
all  its  lineaments  and  colours,  by  the  pencil  of  that  skilful 
man ;  and  what  beautiful  aspect  he  supposeth  it  to  have. 
Let  the  reader,  to  prevent  farther  trouble  in  perusing  tran- 
scriptions of  this  kind,  consider  Rev.  xiii.  8.  p.  114.  Heb. 
ix.  25.  to  the  end ;  which  he  calls  an  illustrious  place  in  the 
same  page  and  forward  ;  1  John  ii.  2.  p.  140.  Rom.  v.  10, 
11.  p.  142,  143.  Eph.  ii.  16.  p.  148,  149.^  Col.  i.  20—22.  Tit. 
14.  p.  156.  Heb.  ix.  14, 15.  p.  157, 158.  Actsxx.  28.  and  many 
others  ;  and  compare  them  with  the  Annotations  on  those 
places,  and  he  will  be  farther  enabled  to  judge  of  the  defence 
made  of  the  one,  by  the  instance  of  the  other ;  I  shall  only  de- 
sire that  he  who  undertakes  to  givehisjudgment  of  this  whole 
matter,  be  somewhat  acquainted  with  the  state  of  the  differ- 
ence, about  this  point  of  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  between 
the  Socinians  and  us  ;  that  he  do  not  take  '  auferre  peccata,' 
to  be  '  ferre  peccata;'  'nostri  causa,'  to  be  '  nostra  vice,'  and 

*  nostro  loco  :'  causa  Trpotyovixivr],  to  be  irpoTapKriKr] :  *  libe 
ratio  a  jugo  peccati,'  to  be  '  redemptio  areatu  peccati :'  '  su 
hire  poenas  siraplicitur,'  to  be  '  subire  poenas  nobis  debitas  : 
to  be  XvTpov,  and  DWH  in  respect  of  the  event,  to  be  so  as  to 


304  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

the  proper  nature  of  the  thhig ;  *  ofFerre  seipsum  in  coslo,'  to  ■ 
be  as  much  as  *  offerre  seipsum  in  cruce,'  as  to  the  work 
itself;  that  so  he  be  not  mistaken  to  think  that,  when  the 
first  are  granted,  that  the  latter  are  so  also.  For  a  close  of 
the  discourse  relating  to  this  head,  a  brief  account  may  be 
added,  why  I  said  not  positively,  that  he  had  wrested  all  the 
places  of  Scripture  giving  testimony  to  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ,  to  another  sense  ;  but  that  he  had  either  done  so,  or 
else  concealed  or  obscured  that  sense  in  them. 

Though  I  might  give  instances  from  one  or  two  places  in 
his  Annotations  on  the  Gospels,  giving  occasion  to  this  as- 
sertion, yet  I  shall  insist  only  on  some  taken  from  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews,  where  is  the  great  and  eminent  seat  of 
the  doctrine  of  Christ's  satisfaction.  Although  in  his  An- 
notations on  that  Epistle,  he  doth  openly  corrupt  the  most 
clear  testimonies  given  to  this  truth,  yet  there  are  some  pas- 
sages in  them,  wherein  he  seems  to  dissent  from  the  Soci- 
nians.  In  his  Annotations  on  chap,  v.  5.  he  hath  these  words; 
'Jesus  cvjdem  sacerdotale  munus  suum  aliquo  modo  erat 
auspicatus  ;  •  cum  semet  patri  victimam  offerret.'  That 
Christ  was  a  priest  when  he  was  on  the  earth,  was  wholly 
denied  by  Socinus,  both  in  his  book  '  de  Servatore,'  and  in 
his  Epistle  to  Niemojevius,  as  I  have  shewed  elsewhere. 
Smalcius  seems  to  be  of  the  same  judgment  in  the  Racovian 
catechism.  Grotius  says,  '  Sacerdotale  munus  erat  aliquo 
modo  auspicatus  ;'  yet  herein  he  goes  not  beyond  Crellius, 
who  tells  us  :  '  mortem  Christus  subiit  duplici  ratione,  par- 
tim  quidem  ut  foederis  mediator  seu  sponsor,  partim  quidem 
ut  sacerdos,  Deo  ipsum  oblaturus:  de  Causis  mortis  Christi,' 
p.  6.  And  so  Volkelius,  fully  to  the  same  purpose  ;  'Partes' 
saith  he,  '  muneris  sacerdotis,  haec  sunt  potissimum ;  mac- 
tatio  victimee,  in  tabernaculum  ad  oblationem-peragendara, 
ingressio,  et  ex  eodem  egressio  :  Ac  mactatio  quidem  mor- 
tem Christi,  violentam  sanguinis  profusionem  continet :'  De 
Relig.  lib.  3.  cap.  47.  p.  145.  and  again:  *  Hinc  colligitur 
solam  Christi  mortem  nequaquam  illam  perfectam  absolu- 
tamque  ipsius  oblationem  (de  qua  in  Epistola  ad  Hebrseos 
agitur)  fuisse,  sed  principium  et  praeparationem  quandam 
ipsius  sacerdotii  in  cselo  demuni  administrandi  extitisse,' 
ibid.  So  that  nothing  is  obtained  by  Grotius's  'munus 
sacerdotale  aliquo  modo  erat  auspicatus/ but  what  is  granted 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS,  305 

by  Crellius  and  Volkelius.  But  in  the  next  words,  '  cum 
semet  ofFerret  patri  victimam/  he  seems  to  leave  them  ;  but 
he  seems  only  so  to  do.  For  Volkelius  acknowledgeth  that 
he  did  slay  the  sacrifice  in  his  death,  though  that  was  not 
his  complete  and  perfect  oblation,  which  is  also  afterward 
affirmed  by  Grotius  ;  and  Crellius  expressly  affirms  the 
same.  Nor  doth  he  seem  to  intend  a  proper,  expiatory,  and 
satisfactory  sacrifice  in  that  expression  ;  for  if  he  had,  he 
would  not  have  been  guilty  of  such  an  aKUjOoAo-yia,  as  to  say, 
*  semet  obtulit  patri.'  Besides,  though  he  do  acknowledge 
elsewhere,  that  this  '  victima'  was  Dli'K,  and  v-jrip  ajuapriMv, 
yet  he  says  in  another  place,  (on  ver.  3.)  '  Sequitur  Christum 
quoque  obtulisse  pro  se  virlp  afxapriCjv'^  giving  thereby  such 
a  sense  to  that  expression,  as  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  a 
proper  expiatory  sacrifice  for  sin.  And  which  is  yet  worse, 
on  chap.  ix.  14.  he  gives  us  such  an  account  why  expiation 
is  ascribed  to  the  blood  of  Christ,  as  is  a  key  to  his  whole 
interpretation  of  that  epistle  :  '  Sanguini,'  saith  he,  '  purga- 
tio  istatribuitur :  quia  per  sanguinem,  idjest,  mortem  Christi, 
secuta  ejus  excitatione  et  evectione,  gignitur  in  nobis  fides, 
quse  deinde  purgat  corda.'  And  therefore,  where  Christ  is 
said  to  offer  himself  by  the  eternal  Spirit,  he  tells  us, '  Obla- 
tio  Christi  hie  intelligitur  ilia,  quae  oblationi  legali  in  adyto 
factse  respondet,  ea  autem  est,  non  oblatio  in  altari  crucis 
facta,  sed  in  adyto  caslesti :'  So  that  the  purgation  of  sin  is 
an  eflTect  of  Christ's  presenting  himself  in  heaven  only  ; 
which  how  well  it  agrees  with  what  the  apostle  says,  chap, 
i.  3.  the  reader  will  easily  judge.  And  to  manifest  that 
this  was  his  constant  sense,  on  those  words,  ver.  26.  ug  a^i- 
Ttjmv  afiapriag,  Sta  Trig  ^vaiag  avrov,  he  thus  comments :  elg 
adhnaiv  aixapriag'  '  Ut  peccatum  in  nobis  extinguatur ;  fit 
autem  hoc  per  passionem  Christi,  quse  fidem  nobis  ingenerat, 
quse  corda  purificat.'  Christ  confirming  his  doctrine  by  his 
death,  begets  faith  in  us,  which  doth  the  work.  Of  the 
28th  verse  of  the  same  chapter,  I  have  spoken  before.  The 
same  he  affirms  again,  more  expressly,  on  chap.  x.  3.  and 
verses  9.  12.  he  interprets  the  oblation  of  Christ,  whereby  he 
took  away  sin,  to  be  the  oblation  or  offering  himself  in  hea- 
ven, whereby  sin  is  taken  away  by  sanctification,  as  also  in 
sundry  other  places,  where  the  expiatory  sacrifice  of  Chrisj^ 


306  A     REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

on  earth,  and  the  taking  away  of  the  guilt  of  sin  by  satis- 
faction, is  evidently  intended.  So  that  notwithstanding  the 
concession  mentioned,  I  cannot  see  the  least  reason  to  alter 
my  thoughts  of  the  Annotations,  as  to  this  business  in  hand. 
Not  farther  to  abound  m  causa  facili,  in  all  the  differences 
we  have  with  the  Socinians,  about  Christ's  dying  for  us, 
concerning  the  nature  of  redemption,  reconciliation,  medi- 
ation, sacrifice,  the  meaning  of  all  the  phrases  and  expres- 
sions, which  in  those  things  are  delivered  to  us,  the  anno- 
tator  is  generally  on  the  apostate  side  throughout  his  Anno- 
tations ;  and  the  truth  is,  I  know  no  reason  why  our  students 
should  with  so  much  diligence  and  charge,  labour  to  get 
into  their  hands  the  books  of  Socinus,  Crellius,  Smalcius, 
and  the  rest  of  that  crew,  seeing  these  Annotations,  as  to  the 
most  important  heads  of  Christian  religion,  about  the  Deity, 
sacrifice,  priesthood,  and  satisfaction  of  Christ,  original  sin, 
free  will,  justification,  &c.  afford  them  the  substance  and 
marrow  of  what  is  spoken  by  them  ;  so  that  as  to  these  heads, 
upon  the  matter,  there  is  nothing  peculiar  to  the  annotator, 
but  the  secular  learning  which  in  his  interpretations  he  hath 
curiously  and  gallantly  interweaved.  Plautus  naakes  sport 
in  his  Amphitruo  with  several  persons,  some  real,  some  as- 
sumed, of  such  likeness  one  to  another,  that  they  could  not 
discern  themselves  by  any  outward  appearance ;  which 
caused  various  contests  and  mistakes  between  them.  The 
Poet's  fancy  raised  not  a  greater  similitude  between  Mercury 
and  Sosia,  being  supposed  to  be  different  persons,  than  there 
is  a  dissimilitude  between  the  author  of  the  book  '  de  Sa- 
tisfactione  Christi,'  and  of  the  Annotations,  concerning  which 
we  have  been  discoursins;,  being  one  and  the  same.  Nor 
was  the  contest  of  those  different  persons  so  like  one  another, 
so  irreconcilable,  as  are  these  of  this  single  person,  so  unlike 
himself  in  the  several  treatises  mentioned.  And  I  cannot 
but  think  it  strange,  that  the  apologist  could  imagine  no 
surer  measure  to  be  taken  of  Grotius's  meaning  in  his  Anno- 
tations than  his  treatise  of  the  'Satisfaction  of  Christ'  doth 
afford,  there  being  no  two  treatises  that  I  know,  of  any  dif- 
ferent persons  whatever,  about  one  and  the  same  subject, 
that  are  more  at  variance.  Whether  now  any  will  be  per- 
suaded by  the  apologist  to  believe,  that  Grotius  was  constant 


OF    HUGO    GKOTIUS.  307 

in  his  Annotations  to  the  doctrine  delivered  in  that  other 
treatise,  I  am  not  solicitous. 

For  the  reinforced  plea  of  the  apologist,  that  these  An- 
notations were  not  finished  by  him,  but  only  collections  that 
he  might  after  dispose  of,  I  am  not  concerned  in  it;  having 
to  deal  with  that  book  of  Annotations  that  goes  under  his 
name  ;  if  they  are  none  of  his,  it  is  neither  on  the  one  hand 
or  other,  of  any  concernment  unto  me.     I  say  not  this,  as 
though  the  apologist  had  in  the  least  made  good  his  former 
plea,  by  his  new  exceptions  to  my  evidence  against  it,  from 
the  printer's  preface  to    the  volume  of  Annotations  on  the 
Epistles.  He  says,'  what  was  the  opus  integrum  that  was  com- 
mended to  to  the  care  of  6  ^uvaV  and  answers  himself,  'not 
that  last  part  or  volume  of  Annotations,  but  opus  integrum, 
the  whole   volume   or  volumes  that  contained  his   aviK^ora 
adversaria  on  the  New  Testament.'      For  how  ill  this  agrees 
with  the  intention  and  words  of  the  prefacer,  a  slight  in- 
spection will  suffice  to  manifest.     He  tells  us,  that  Grotius 
had  himself  published  his  Annotations  on  the  Gospels,  five 
years  before :  that  at  his  departure  from  Paris,  he  left  a 
great  part  of  this  volume  (that  is  this  on  the  Acts  and  Epistles) 
with  a  friend ;  that  the  reason  why  he  left  not  opus  inte- 
grum that  is,  the  whole  volume,  with  him,  was  because  the 
residue  of  it  was  not  so  written,  as  tliat  an  amanuensis  could 
well   understand  it.     That  therefore  in  his  going  towards 
Sweden,  he  wrote   that  part  again  with  his  own  hand,  and 
sent  it  back  to  the  same  person  (that  had  the  former  part  of 
the  volume  committed  to  him)  from  Hamburgh.    If  the  apo- 
logist read  this  preface,  he  ought,  as  I  suppose  to  have  de- 
sisted from  the  plea  insisted  on.     If  he  did  not,  he  thought 
assuredly  he  had  much  reason  to  despise  them,  with  whom 
he  had  to  do.     But  as  I  said,  herein  am  I  not  concerned. 

The  consideration  of  the  charge  on  the  Annotations,  re- 
lating to  their  tampering  with  the  testimonies  given  in  the 
Scripture^  to  the  Deity  of  Christ,  being  another  head  of  the 
whole,  may  now  have  place. 

The  sum  of  what  is  to  this  purpose  by  me  affirmed,  is,  that 
in  the  Annotations  on  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  Grotius 
hath  left  but  one  place  giving  testimony  clearly  to  the  Deity 
of  Christ.  To  this  assertion  I  added  both  a  limitation,  and 
also  an  enlargement,  in  several  respects.     A  limitation  that 


308  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

I  could  not  perceive  he  had  spoken  of  himself,  clearly  on 
that  one  place.  On  supposition  that  he  did  so,  I  granted 
that  perhaps  one  or  two  places  more,  might  accordingly  be 
interpreted.  That  this  one  place  is  John  i.  1.  I  expressly  af- 
firmed ;  that  is  the  one  place  wherein,  as  I  say,  he  spake 
not  home  to  the  business.  The  defence  of  the  apologist  in 
the  behalf  of  Grotius,  consists  of  sundry  discourses.  First, 
to  disprove  that  he  hath  left  more  than  that  one  of  John 
free  from  the  corruption  charged  ;  he  instances  in  that  one 
of  John  i.  1.  wherein  as  he  saith,  he  expressly  asserts  the 
Deity  of  Christ :  but  yet  wisely  foreseeing,  that  this  instance 
would  not  evade  the  charge,  having  been  expressly  excepted 
(as  to  the  present  inquiry),  and  reserved  to  farther  debate ; 
he  adds  the  places  quoted  by  Grotius  in  the  exposition  of 
that  place ;  as  Prov.  viii.  21—27.  Isa.  xlv.  12.  xlviii.  13. 2  Pet. 
iii.  5.  Col.  i.  16.  from  all  which  he  concludes,  that  the  An- 
notations have  left  more  testimonies  to  the  Deity  of  Christ 
untampered  withal  and  unperverted,  than  my  assertion  will 
allow ;  reckoning  them  all  up  again,  section  the  10th,  and 
concluding  himself  a  successful  advocate  in  this  case,  or  at 
least  under  a  despair  of  ever  being  so  in  any,  if  he  acquit 
not  himself  clearly  in  this.  If  his  failure  herein  be  evinced 
by  the  course  of  his  late  writings,  himself  will  appear  to  be 
most  concerned  ;  I  suppose,  then,  that  on  the  view  of  this  de- 
fence, men  must  needs  suppose  that  in  the  Annotations  on 
the  places  repeated,  and  mustered  a  second  time  by  the  apo- 
logist, Grotius  does  give  their  sense  as  bearing  witness  to 
the  Deity  of  Christ.  Others  may  be  pleased  to  take  it  for 
granted  without  farther  consideration;  for  my  part  being  a 
little  concerned  to  inquire,  I  shall  take  the  pains  to  turn  to 
the  places,  and  give  the  reader  a  brief  account  of  them. 

For  Prov.  viii.  his  first  note  on  the  wisdom  there  spoken 
of  is ;  *  Hsec  de  ea  sapientia  quse  in  lege  apparet  exponunt 
Haebraei,  et  sane  ei,  si  non  soli,  at  praecipue  hsec  attributa 
conveniunt.'  Now  if  the  attributes  here  mentioned,  asrree 
either  solely  or  principally  to  the  wisdom  that  shines  in  the 
law,  how  they  can  be  the  attributes  of  the  person  of  the  eter- 
nal Son  of  God,  I  see  not.  He  adds  no  more  to  that  pur- 
pose, until  he  comes  to  the  22d  verse,  the  verse  of  old  con- 
tested about  with  the  Arians.  His  words  on  that  are  : 
'  Greecum  Aquilse,  est,  tKrlcraro  fxt,  ut  et  Symmachi  et  Theo- 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  309 

dosionis,  respondetque,  beneHsebrseo  >33p,  et  Chaldseus  habet 
n")3,  etLXX.  sKTiae,  sensii  non  malo,  si  creare  sumas  pro  facere 
ut  appareat :  vise  Dei  sunt  operationes  ipsius  ;  sensum  hujus 
loci  et  sequentium  non  male  exprimas  cum  Philone  de  Colo- 
liiis  ;  6  Xoyot;  6  7rp£(Tj3urCjOoc  tmv  yivecnv  £tAjj^d»rwv,  ov  Ku^uirep 
o'laKog  £vaXj7jU£voc  6  riov  oXwv  yuj3£pi'/jrj7C  7reda\iov)(H  rci  avfi- 
iravTU,  (cat  ore  tKoafxairXaarei  \^r]aafXivoq  bpyavi^  tovti^)  irphg  Trjv 
avvTraiTiov  tCov  aVoreXoyjUEVwv  avaTacriv. 

On  verse  27,  he  adds  *  aderam,  id  est,  ^v  irpbg  tov  Qebv, 
ut  infra  John  Evang.  i.  1/  What  clear  and  evident  tesimony 
by  this  exposition  is  left  in  this  place  to  the  Deity  of  Chi'ist, 
I  profess  myself  as  ignorant  as  I  was  before  I  received  this 
direction  by  the  apologist.  He  tells  us,  that  >33p  is  rendered 
not  amiss  by  the  Chaldee  m^,  and  the  LXX.  eKTias,  though  he 
knew  that  sense  was  pleaded  by  the  Arians,  and  exploded 
by  the  ancient  doctors  of  the  church.  To  relieve  this  con- 
cession, he  tells  us  that  'creare,'  may  be  taken  for  'facere 
ut  appareat,'  though  there  be  no  evidence  of  such  a  use  of 
the  word  in  Scripture,  nor  can  he  give  any  instance  thereof. 
The  whole  interpretation  runs  on  that  wisdom  that  is  a  pro- 
perty of  God,  which  he  manifested  in  the  works  of  creation  : 
of  the  Son  of  God,  the  essential  wisdom  of  God,  sub- 
sisting with  the  Father,  we  have  not  one  word  :  nor  doth  that 
quotation  out  of  Philo  relieve  us  in  this  business  at  all.  We 
know  in  what  sense  he  used  the  word  6  \6yog  ;  how  far  he 
and  the  Platonics,  with  whom  in  this  expression  he  con- 
sented, were  from  understanding  the  only  begotten  Son  of 
God,  is  known.  If  this  of  Philo  has  any  aspect  towards 
the  opinion  of  any  professing  themselves  Christians,  it  is 
towards  that  of  the  Arians,  which  seems  to  be  expressed 
therein.  And  this  is  the  place  chosen  by  the  apologist  to 
disprove  the  assertion  of  none  being  left,  under  the  sense 
given  them  by  the  Annotations,  bearing  clear  testimony  to 
the  Deity  of  Christ ;  his  comparing  >3N  dW  ibi  ego,  which 
the  Vulgar  renders  '  aderam/  with  rjv  irpog  tuv  Qwv,  seems 
rather  to  cast  a  suspicion  on  his  intention  in  the  expres- 
sion of  that  place  of  the  Evangelist,  than  in  the  least  to  give 
testimony  to  the  Deity  of  Christ  in  this.  If  any  one  be 
farther  desirous  to  be  satisfied,  how  many  clear  unquestion- 
able evidences  of  the  Deity  of  Christ  are  slighted  by  these 
Annotations  on  this  chapter,  let  him  consult  my  vindication 


310  A    REVIEW    OF    THE.  ANNOTATIONS 

of  the  place  in  my  late  'VindiciseEvangelicse/  where  he  will 
find  something  tendered  to  him  to  that  purpose.  What  the 
apologist  intended  by  adding  these  two  places  of  Isaiah, 
chap.  xlv.  12.  and  the  xlviii.  13,  (when  in  his  Annotations 
on  those  places,  Grotius  not  once  mentions  the  Deity  of 
Christ,  nor  any  thing  of  him,  nor  hath  occasion  so  to  do,  nor 
doth  produce  them  in  this^place  to  any  such  end  or  purpose, 
but  only  to  shew  that  the  Chaldee  paraphrase  doth  sundry 
times,  when  things  are  said  to  be  done  by  God,  render  it, 
that  they  were  done  by  the  word  of 'God),  as  instances  to 
the  prejudice  of  my  assertion,  I  cannot  imagine. 

On  that  of  Peter,  2  Epistle  iii.  5.  ti^  tgv  Gtou  Xoyw,  he 
adds  indeed,  '  vide  qu2G  diximus  ad  initium  Evangelii  Jo- 
hannis  :'  but  neither  doth  that  place  intend  the  natural  Son 
of  God,  nor  is  it  so  interpreted  by  Grotius. 

To  these  he  adds  in  the  close;  Col.  i.  16.  in  the  exposi- 
tion whereof  in  his  Annotations,  he  expressly  prevaricates, 
and  goes  of  to  the  interpretation  insisted  on  by  Socinus  and 
his  companions,  which  the  apologist  well  knew.  Without 
farther  search  upon  what  hath  been  spoken,  the  apologist 
gives  in  his  verdict  concerning  the  falseness  of  my  assertion 
before-mentioned,  of  the  annotator's  speaking  clear  and 
home  to  the  Deity  of  Christ  but  in  one,  if  in  one  place  of  his 
Annotations.     But, 

1.  What  one  other  place  hath  he  produced,  whereby  the 
contrary,  to  what  I  assert,  is  evinced  ?  Any  man  may  make 
apologies  at  this  rate  as  fast  as  he  pleases. 

2.  As  to  his  not  speaking  clearly  in  that  one,  notwith- 
standing the  improvement  made  of  his  expressions  by  the 
apologist,  I  am  still  of  the  same  mind  as  formerly.  For  al- 
though he  ascribes  an  eternity,  no  Xoyo^,  and  affirms  all  things 
to  be  made  thereby  ;  yet  considering  how  careful  he  is,  of 
ascribing  an  vTroaraaiq,  ti^  Xoyw,  how  many  Platonic  inter- 
pretations of  that  expression  he  interweaves  in  his  exposi- 
tions, how  he  hath  darkened  the  whole  counsel  of  God  in 
that  place  about  the  subsistence  of  the  Word,  its  omnipotency 
and  incarnation,  so  clearly  asserted  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
therein,  I  see  no  reason  to  retract  the  assertion  opposed. 
But  yet  as  to  the  thing  itself,  about  this  place  I  will  not 
contend  :  only  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  observe,  that  not  only 
the  Arians,  but  even  Photinus  himself  acknowledged  that 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  311 

the  world  was  made  tm  Qeov  XoJyt^,  that  how  little  is  obtained 
towards  the  confirmation  of  the  Deity  of  Christ  by  that  con- 
cession, may  be  discerned. 

I  shall  offer  also  only  at  present,  that  6  Xoyog  tov  Qeov, 
is  threefold,  \6yog  vTroaTaTiKog,  Ivdid^erog,  and  irpocpopiKog. 
The  \6yoQ  virocrTciTiKOQ  or  ovmwSrjc  is  Christ,  mentioned  John 
i.  1.  his  personal  or  eternal  subsistence,  with  his  omnipo- 
tency,  being-  there  asserted.  Whether  Christ  be  so  called 
any  where  else  in  the  New  Testament  may  be  disputed: 
Luke  i.  2.  (compared  with  1  John  i.  1.)  2  Pet.  i  16.  Acts 
XX.  32.  Heb.  iv.  12.  are  the  most  likely  to  give  us  that  use 
of  the  word.  Why  Christ  is  so  termed,  I  have  shewed  else- 
where. That  he  is  called  IDT  Psal.  xxxiii.  6.  is  to  me  also 
evident.  n^D  is  better  rendered  piii/xa,  or  Xi^ig,  than  \6yog. 
Where  that  word  is  used,  it  denotes  not'  Christ  :  though 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  2.  where  that  word  is,  is  urged  by  some  to 
that  purpose.  He  is  also  called  121  Hag.  ii.  5.  so  perhaps 
in  other  places.  Our  present  Quakers  would  have  that  ex- 
pression of  the  word  of  God,  used  nowhere  in  any  other 
sense :  so  that  destroying  that,  as  they  do,  in  the  issue  they 
may  freely  despise  the  Scripture,  as  that  which  they  say  is 
not  the  word  of  God,  nor  any  where  so  called.  Aoyog  IvBia- 
^£Tog  amongst  men,  is  that  which  Aristotle  calls,  tov  iao) 
Ao-yov*  \6yog  Iv  vio  XajUJSavo^Evoc?  says  Hesychius.  Aoyog 
evBia^erog  \s  that  which  we  speak  in  our  hearts,  says  Dama- 
scen.de  Orthod.  Fid.  lib.  1.  cap.  18.  So  Psal.  xiv.  1.^:33  IDK 
O^D.  This  as  spoken  in  respect  of  God,  is  that  egress  of  his 
power,  whereby  according  to  the  eternal  conception  of  his 
mind,  he  vvorketh  any  thing.  So  Gen.  i.  2.  '  God  said.  Let 
there  be  light,  and  there  was  light.'  Of  this  word  of  God 
the  Psalmist  treats,  cxlvii.  ver.  18.  'he  sendeth  out  nDT  and 
melteth  the  ice,' and  Psal.  cxlviii.  8.  the  same  word  is  used.  In 
both  which  places  the  Septuagint  renders  it  by  6  Xoyog. 
This  is  that  which  is  called  prifna  rrig  ^vvajiistjg,  Heb.  i.  3. 
xi.  3.  where  the  apostle  says,  the  heavens  were  made  prifxari 
Geou,  which  is  directly  parallel  to  that  place  of  2  Pet. 
iii.  5.  where  it  is  expressed  no  tov  Qeov  \6yio  :  for  though 
prifjia  more  properly  denotes  Xoyov  TrpoipopiKov,  yet  in  these 
places,  it  signifies  plainly  that  egress  of  God's  power  for  the 
production  and  preservation  of  things,  being  a  pursuit  of  the 
eternal  conception  of  his  mind,  M-hich  is  Xoyog  evdia^erog. 


312  A    REVIEW     OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

Now  this  infinite,  wise,  and  eternal  conception  of  the  mind 
of  God,  exerting  itself  in  power,  wherein  God  s  said  to 
speak,  *  he  said.  Let  there  be  light,'  is  that  which  the  Plato- 
nics, and  Philo  with  them,  liarped  on,  never  once  dreaming 
of  a  co-essential  and  hypostatical  word  of  God,  though  the 
word  airoaTamt;  occur  amongst  them.  This  they  thought 
was  unto  God,  as  in  us,  \6jug  IvdiaOerog  or  6  ectw,  irpbg  vovv' 
and  particularly  it  is  termed  by  Philo,  (piov^  rr^g  diavolag  ev- 
pvvofxivr]'  de  Agric.  That  this  was  his  6  Xoyoc  is  most  evi- 
dent. Hence  he  tells  us,  ovdlv  av  erepov  tnrot  rbv  vorjrtv 
ilvai  Kogjiiov  rj  Oeov  \6yov  rjdi]  KOcriiiOTroinvvog.  ouSf  "yojO  ?j  voijrrj 
iroXig  iTSpov  ti  Icttiv,  rj  6  tov  ap-)^iTiKTOvog  XoyKJfxog,  i^Sr)  Trjv 
voYiTTJv  TToXiv  KTiZ,£iv  diavovfxivov.  Mu}aiu)g  yap  to  ^oyfia  tovto, 
ouK  Ifxov'  de  Mund.  Opific.  and  a  little  after,  tov  Si  aopuTov 
Koi  vorjTov  ^eiov  \6yov,  HKOva  \iyH  Qeov'  koX  TavTr\g  UKOva  tov 
vor\Tov  ^u)g  Ik£ivo,  6  ^tiov  \6yov  yiyovtv  fjKwv  tov  diepfxrjvev- 
aavTog  ty^v  yiveaiv  avTOv'  et  lariv  virepovpaviog  aaTi]p.  The 
whole  tendency  of  his  discourse  is,  that  the  word  of  God,  in 
his  mind,  in  the  creation  of  the  world,  was  the  image  of  him- 
self; and  that  the  idea  or  image  of  the  things  to  be  made, 
but  especially  of  light.  And  whereas  (if  I  remember  aright, 
for  1  cannot  now  find  the  place)  I  have  said  somewhere,  that 
Christ  was  \6yog  IvSiaOarog,  though  therein  I  have  the  con- 
sent of  very  many  learned  divines,  and  used  it  merely  in  op- 
position T(j)  Trpo(j)opiKU)  ;  yet  I  desire  to  recall  it :  nor  do  I  think 
there  is  any  propriety  in  that  expression  of  fjuc^uroc  used  of 
Christ,  but  only  in  those  of  vTroaTciTiKog  and  ouatwSrjc,  which 
the  Scripture  (though  not  in  the  very  terms)  will  make  good. 
In  this  second  acceptation,  tov  \6yov,  Photinus  himself 
granted  that  the  world  was  made  by  the  word  of  God.  Now 
if  it  be  thought  necessary,  that  I  should  give  an  account  of 
my  fear  that  nothing  but  6  X670C  in  this  sense,  decked  with 
many  platonical  encomiums,  was  intended  in  the  Annotations 
on  John  i.  (though  1  confess  much,  from  some  quotations 
there  used,  may  be  said  against  it)  I  shall  readily  undertake 
the  task ;  but  at  present  in  this  running  course,  I  shall  add 
no  more. 

But  now,  as  if  all  the  matter  in  hand  were  fully  des- 
patched, we  have  this  triumphant  close  attending  the  former 
discourse  and  observations. 

'If  one  text  acknowledged  to  assert  Christ's  eternal  divi- 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  313 

nity*  (which  one  was  granted  to  do  it,  though  not  clearly), 
*  will  not  suffice  to  conclude  him  no  Socinian'/ which  I  said  not 
he  was,  yea,  expressly  waved  the  management  of  any  such 
charge);  *  if  six  verses  in  the  Proverbs,  two  in  Isaiah,  one  in 
St.  Peter,  one  in  St.  Paul,  added  to  many  in  the  beginning  of 
St.  John'  (in  his  Annotations,  on  all  which  he  speaks  not  one 
word  to  the  purpose), '  will  not  yet  amount  to  above  one  text ; 
or  lastly,  if  that  one  may  be  doubted  of  also,  which  is  by  him 
interpreted  to  affirm  Christ's  eternal  subsistence  with  God 
before  the  creation  of  the  world'  (which  he  doth  not  so  inter- 
pret, as  to  a  personal  subsistence),  'and  that  the  whole  world 
was  created  by  him ;  I  shall  despair  of  ever  being  a  success- 
ful advocate  for  any  man ;'  from  which  condition  I  hope  some 
little  time  will  recover  the  apologist. 

This  is  the  sum  of  what  is  pleaded  in  chief,  for  the  de- 
fence of  the  Annotations:  wherein  what  small  cause  he  hath 
to  acquiesce,  who  hath  been  put  to  the  labour  and  trouble 
of  vindicating  near  forty  texts  of  Scripture,  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament and  New,  giving  express  testimony  to  the  Deity  of 
Christ  from  the  annotator's  perverse  interpretations,  let  the 
reader  judge.  In  the  13th  section  of  the  apologist's  dis- 
course, he  adds  some  other  considerations  to  confirm  his 
former  vindication  of  the  Annotations. 

1.  He  tells  us,  that  he  '  professeth  not  to  divine  what 
places  of  the  Old  Testament,  wherein  the  Deity  of  Christ  is 
evidently  testified  unto,  are  corrupted  by  the  learned  man, 
nor  will  he  upon  the  discouragement  already  received  make 
any  inquiry  into  my  treatise.' 

But  what  need  of  divination  ?  The  apologist  cannot  but 
remember  at  all  times,  some  of  the  texts  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment that  are  pleaded  to  that  purpose  ;  and  he  hath  at  least 
as  many  encouragements  to  look  into  the  Annotations,  as 
discouragements  from  casting  an  eye  upon  that  volume  as 
he  calls  it,  wherein  they  are  called  to  an  account.  And  if  he 
suppose  he  can  make  a  just  defence  for  the  several  places  so 
wrested  and  perverted,  without  once  consulting  of  them,  I 
know  not  how  by  me  he  might  possibly  be  engaged  into 
such  an  inquiry.  And  therefore  I  shall  not  name  them  again, 
having  done  somewhat  more  than  name  them  already. 

But  he  hath  two  suppletory  considerations,  that  will 

VOL.    IX.  Y 


314  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

render  any  such  inquiry  or  inspection  needless.     Of  these 
the  first  is, 

'  That  the  word  of  God  being  all  and  every  part  of  it  of 
equal  truth,  that  doctrine  which  is  founded  on  five  places  of 
divine  writ,  must  by  all  Christians  be  acknowledged  to  be 
as  irrefragably  confirmed,  as  a  hundred  express  places  would 
be  conceived  to  confirm  it.' 

Alls.  It  is  confessed,  that  not  only  five,  but  any  one  ex- 
press text  of  Scripture,  is  sufficient  for  the  confirmation  of 
any  divine  truth.  But  that  five  places  have  been  produced 
put  of  the  Annotations  by  the  apologist  for  the  confirmation 
of  the  great  truth  pleaded  about,  is  but  pretended,  indeed 
there  is  no  such  thing.  The  charge  on  Grotius  was,  that  he 
had  depraved  all  but  one  :  if  that  be  no  crime,  the  defence 
was  at  hand  ;  if  it  be,  though  that  one  should  be  acknow- 
ledged to  be  clear  to  that  purpose,  here  is  no  defence  against 
that  which  was  charged,  but  a  strife  about  that  which  was 
not.  Let  the  places  be  consulted,  if  the  assertion  prove  true, 
by  an  induction  of  instances,  the  crime  is  to  be  confessed, 
or  else  the  charge  denied  to  contain  a  crime.  But, 

Secondly,  he  says,  '  That  this  charge  upon  inquiry  will  be 
found  in  some  degree,  if  not  equally,  chargeable  on  the  learn- 
edest  and  most  valuable  of  the  first  reformers,  particularly 
upon  Mr.  Calvin  himself,  who  hath  been  as  bitterly  and  un- 
justly accused  and  reviled  upon  this  account  (witness  the 
book  intitled  '  Calvino  Turcismus')  as  ever  Erasmus  was  by 
Bellarmine  and  Beza,  or  as  probably  Grotius  maybe.' 

Though  this  at  the  best  be  but  a  diversion  of  the  charge, 
and  no  defence,  yet,  not  containing  that  truth  which  is  need- 
ful to  countenance  it,  for  the  end  for  which  it  is  proposed ; 
I  could  not  pass  it  by.  It  is  denied  (which  in  this  case  until 
farther  proof  must  suffice)  that  any  of  the  learnedest  of  the 
first  reformers,  and  particularly  Mr.  Calvin,  are  equally 
chargeable,  or  in  any  degree  of  proportion  with  Grotius,  as 
to  the  crime  insisted  on.  Calvin  being  the  man  instanced 
in,  I  desire  the  apologist  to  prove  that  he  hath  in  all  his 
commentaries  on  the  Scripture,  corrupted  the  sense  of  any 
texts  of  the  Old  Testament  or  New,  giving  express  testimony 
to  the  Deity  of  Christ,  and  commonly  pleaded  to  that  end 
and  purpose.     Although  I  deny  not,  but  that  he  differs  from 


OF    HUGO    GROTIUS.  315 

the  common  judgment  of  most,  in  the  interpretation  of  some 
few  prophetical  passages,  judged  by  them  to  relate  to  Christ. 
I  know  what  Genebrard  and  some  others  of  that  faction, 
raved  against  him  ;  but  it  was  chiefly  from  some  expressions 
in  his  institutions  about  the  Trinity  (wherein  yet  he  is  ac- 
quitted by  the  most  learned  of  themselves)  and  not  from  his 
expositions  of  Scripture,  for  which  they  raised  their  cla- 
mours. For  the  book  called  'Calvino  Turcismus,' written  by 
Reynolds  and  GifFard,  the  apologisthasforgotten  the  design 
of  it.  Calvin  is  no  more  concerned  in  it,  than  others  of  the 
first  reformers  ;  nor  is  it  from  any  doctrine  about  the  Deity 
of  Christ  in  particular,  but  from  the  whole  of  the  reformed 
religion,  with  the  apostacies  of  some  of  that  profession,  that 
they  compare  it  with  Turcism.  Something  indeed,  in  a  chap- 
ter or  two,  they  speak  about  the  Trinity,  from  some  expres- 
sions of  Luther,  Melancthon,  Calvin,  and  others:  but  as  to 
Calvin's  expositions  of  Scripture,  they  insist  not  on  them. 
Possibly  the  apologist  may  have  seen  Pareus's  '  Calvinus 
Orthodoxus,'  in  answer  to  Hunnius's  *  Calvinus  Judaizans;' 
if  not,  he  may  at  any  time  have  there  an  account  of  this  ca- 
lumny. 

Having  passed  through  the  consideration  of  the  two  con- 
siderable heads  of  this  discourse,  in  the  method  called  for 
by  the  apologist  (having  only  taken  liberty  to  transpose 
them,  as  to  first  and  last)  I  must  profess  myself  as  yet  un- 
satisfied as  to  the  necessity,  or  suitableness,  of  this  kind  of 
defence.  The  sum  of  that  which  I  affirmed  (which  alone 
gives  occasion  to  the  defensative  now  under  consideration) 
is,  that  to  my  observation,  Grotius,  in  his  Annotations  had 
not  left  above  one  text  of  Scripture,  if  one,  giving  clear  evi- 
dence to  the  Deity  of  Christ ;  of  his  satisfaction  I  said  in 
sura  the  same  thing.  Had  the  apologist  been  pleased  to 
have  produced  instances  of  any  evidence  for  the  disprove- 
ment  of  my  assertion,  I  should  very  gladly  and  readily  have 
acknowledged  my  mistake  and  oversight.  I  am  still  also  in 
the  same  resolution,  as  to  the  latitude  of  the  expression, 
though  I  have  already  by  an  induction  of  particulars,  mani- 
fested his  corrupting  and  perverting  of  so  many,  both  in  re- 
spect of  the  one  head  and  of  the  other,  with  his  express  com- 
pliance with  the  Socinians  in  his  so  doing,  as  that  I  cannot 
have  the  least  thought  of  letting  fall  my  charge,  which,  with 

Y  2 


316  A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS 

the  limitation  expressed  (of  my  own  observation),  contains 
the  truth  in  this  matter,  and  nothing  but  that  which  is  so. 
It  was  indeed  in  my  thoughts  to  have  done  somewhat 
more  in  reference  to  those  Annotations,  than  thus  occasion- 
ally to  have  animadverted  on  their  corruption  in  general ; 
namely,  to  have  proceeded  in  the  vindication  of  the  truths  of 
the  gospel  from  their  captivity  under  the  false  glosses  put  upon 
them,  by  the  interpretations  of  places  of  Scripture  wherein 
they  are  delivered.  But  this  work  being  fallen  on  an  abler 
hand,  viz.  that  of  our  learned  professor  of  divinity,  my  de- 
sire is  satisfied,  and  the  necessity  of  my  endeavour  for  that 
end  removed. 

There  are  sundry  other  particulars  insisted  on  by  the 
apologist,  and  a  great  deal  of  rhetoric  is  laid  out  about 
them,  which  certainly  deserves  not  the  reader's  trouble  in 
the  perusal  of  any  other  debate  about  them.  If  they  did,  it 
were  an  easy  matter  to  discover  his  mistakes  in  them  all 
along.  The  foundation  of  most  of  them,  lies  in  that  which 
he  affirms,  sect.  4.  where  he  says,  that  '  I  thus  state  the  jea- 
lousies about  H.  G.  as  far  as  it  is  owned  by  me,  viz.  that  being 
in  doctrine  a  Socinian,  he  yet  closed  in  many  things  with  the 
Roman  interest.'  To  which  he  replies,  that  *  this  does  not  so 
much  as  pretend  that  he  was  a  Papist.' 

As  though  I  undertake  to  prove  Grotius  to  be  a  Papist, 
or  did  not  expressly  disown  the  management  of  the  jealousy, 
stated  as  above ;  or  that  I  did  at  all  own  it,  all  which  are 
otherwise  ;  yet  I  shall  now  say,  whether  he  was  in  docti'ine  a 
Socinian  or  no,  let  his  Annotations  before  insisted  on,  deter- 
mine :  and  whether  he  closed  with  the  Roman  interest  or  no, 
besides  what  hath  been  observed  by  others,  I  desire  the  apo- 
logist to  consider  his  observation  on  Rev.  xii.  5.  that  book 
(himself  being  judge,)  having  received  his  last  hand.  But 
my  business  is  not  to  accuse  Grotius,  or  to  charge  his  me- 
mory with  anything  but  his  prevarication  in  his  Annotations 
on  the  Scripture.^ 

And  as  I  shall  not  cease  to  press  the  general  aphorism  (as 
it  is  called),  that  no  drunkard,  8lc.  nor  any  person  whatever 
not  born  of  God  or  united  to  Christ  the  head,  by  the  same 
Spirit  that  is  in  him,  and  in  the  sense  thereof,  perfecting  ho- 

a  Grotius  ad  nocentissimse  ha?reseos  atque  efrenis  licentiae  8cyllarn,iterunique  ;  ad 
tyrannidis  charybdin  declinavitfluctuans  :  Essen. 


OF    HUGO    GllOTlUS.  317 

liness  in  the  fear  of  God,  shall  ever  see  his  face  in  glory,  so 
I  fear  not  what  conclusion  can  regularly  in  reference  to  any 
person  living  or  dead,  be  thence  deduced. 

It  is  of  the  Annotations  whereof  I  have  spoken,  which  I 
have  my  liberty  to  do :  and  I  presume  shall  still  continue, 
whilst  I  live  in  the  same  thoughts  of  them  :  though  I  should 
see  a  third  defence  of  the  learned  Huo-o  Grotius. 


The  Epistles  of  Grotius  to  Crellius  mentioned  by  the  apolo- 
gist in  his  first  defence  of  him,  giving  some  light  to  what 
hath  been  insisted  on,  I  thought  it  not  unfit  to  communi- 
cate them  to  the  reader,  as  they  came  to  my  hand,  having 
not  as  yet  been  printed  that  I  know  of. 

Reverendo  summaque  eruditionis  ac  pietalis  viro  Domino 
Johanni  Crellio  jiastori  liacov.  H.  G,  S. 

'  Libro  tuo''  quo  ad  eum  quem  ego  quondam  scripseram  (Eru- 
ditissime  Crelli)  respondisti,  adeo  offensus  non  fui,  ut  etiam 
gratias  tunc  intra  animum  meum  egerim,  nmic  et  hisce  agam 
literis.     Primo,  quod  non  tantum  humane,  sed  et  valde  of- 
ficiose  mecum  egeris,  ita  ut  quaeri  nihil  possim,  nisi  quod  in 
me  prsedicando,  modum  interdumexcedis,  deinde  vero,  quod 
multa  me  docueris,  partini  utilia,  partim  jucunda  scitu,  me- 
que  exemplo  tuo  incitaveris  ad  penitius  expendendum  sensus 
sacrorum  librorum.     Bene  autem  in  Epistola  tua  quae  mihi 
longe  gratissima  advenit,  de  me  judicas,  non  esse  me  eorum 
in  numero  qui  ob  sententias  salva  pietate  dissidentes  alieno 
a  quoquam  sim  animo,aut  boni  alicujus  amicitiam  repudiem. 
Equidem  in  libro''  'de  veraReligione,'  quemjampercurri,  re- 
lecturus  et  posthac,  multa  invenio  summo  cumjudicio  ob- 
servata.     Illud  vero   seeculo  gratulor,  repertos  homines  qui 
neutiquam  in  controversiis  subtilibus  tantum  ponunt,  quan- 
tum in  vera  vitse  emendatione,  et  quotidiano  ad  sanctitatem 
profectu.     Utinam  et  mea  scripta  aliquid  ad  hoc  studium  in 
animis   hominum   excitanduni  inflammandumque ;  conferre 
possint :  tunc  enim  non  frustra  me  vixisse  hactenus  existi- 
raem.     Liber  '  de  veritate  Religionis  Christianae'  magis  ut  no- 
bis esset  solatio,  quam  ut  aliis  documento  scriptus,  non  video 

b  This  book  of  Crellius  lay  unansnered  by  Grotius  above  twenty  years.     For  so 
long  he  lived  after  the  jjublishing  of  it.     It  is  since  fully  answered  by  Esscnius. 
«  That  is  the  body  of  Socinian  divinity  written  by  Crellius  and  Volkelius. 


318         A    REVIEW    OF    THE    ANNOTATIONS,    &C. 

quid  post  tot  aliorum  labores  utilitatis  afFevre  possit,  nisi  ipsa 
forte  brevitate.  Siquid  tamen  in  eo  est,  quod  tibi  tuiqufe 
similibus  placeat,  mihi  supra  evenit.  Libris  'de  jure  Belli  et 
Pacis'  mihi  prascipue  propositum  habui,  ut  feritatem  illara, 
non  Christianis  tantum,  sed  ethominibus  indignam,  ad  bella 
pro  libitu  suscipienda,  pro  libitu  gerenda,  quam  gliscere  tot 
populorum  malo  quotidie  video,  quantum  in  me  est,  sedarera. 
Gaudeo  ad  principum  quorundam  manus  eos  libros  venisse, 
qui  utinam  partem  eorum  meliorem  in  suum  animum  admit- 
terent.  NuUus  enim  mihi  ex  eo  labore  suavior  fructus  con- 
tingere  possit.  Te  vero  quod  attinet,  credas,  rogo,  si  quid 
unquam  facere  possim  tui,aut  eorum  quos  singulariteramas, 
causa,  experturum  te,  quantum  te  tuo  merito  faciam.  Nunc 
quum  aliud  possim  nihil,  Dominum  Jesum  supplice  animo 
veneror,  ut  tibi  aliisque ;  pietatem  promoventibas  propitius 
adsit. 

x.Maii.M.  DC.XXVI. 
Tui  nominis  studiosissimus.  H.  G. 

Tam  pro  Epistola  (vir  Clarissime)  quam  pro  transmisso  libro, 
gratias  ago  maximas.  Constitui  et  legere  et  relegere  dili- 
genter  qusecunque  a  te  proficiscuntur,  expertus  quo  cum 
fructu  id  antehac  fecerim.  Eo  ipso  tempore  quo  literas  tuas 
accepi,  versabar  in  lectione  tuae  interpretationis  in'^Episto- 
1am  ad  Galatas.  Quantum  judicare  possum  et  scripti  oc- 
casionem  et  propositum,  et  totam  seriem  dictionis,  ut  mag- 
na cum  cura  indagasti,  ita  feliciter  adniodum  es  assequutus. 
Quare  Deum  precor,  ut  et  tibi  et  tui  similibus,  vitam  det,  et 
quae  alia  ad  istiusmodi  labores  necessaria.  Mihi  ad  juvan- 
dam  communem  Christianismi  causam,  utinam  tam  adessent 
vires,  quam  promptus  est  animus :  quippe  me,  a  prima  aetate, 
per  varia  disciplinarum  genera  jactatum,  nulla  res  magis  de- 
lectavit,  quam  rerum  sacrarum  meditatio.  Id  in  rebus  pros- 
peris  moderamen,  id  in  adversis  solamen  sensi.  Pacis  con- 
silia  et  amavi  semper  et  amo  nunc  quoque  ;  eoque  doleo, 
quum  video,  tam  pertinaeibus  iris  committi  inter  se  eos,  qui 
Christi  se  esse  dicunt.  Si  recte  rem  putamus,  quantillis  de 
eausis 

Januarii.  M.  DC.  XXXII.  Amstelodam. 

^  J.et  the   reader  judge  what  annotations  on  that  Epistle  we  are  to  expect  from 
thi«  man. 


A 

DISSERTATION 

ON 

DIVINE     JUSTICE 


CLAIMS  OF  VINDICATORY  JUSTICE 
ASSERTED. 


THIS  WORK  THAT  ESSENTIAL  PROPERTY  OF 

THE  DIVINE  NATURE  IS  DEMONSTRATED  FROM  THE  SACRED 

WRITINGS,  AND  CLEARLY  DEFENDED  AGAINST 

SOCINUS  AND  HIS  FOLLOWERS : 

LIKEWISE, 

THE  NECESSARY  EXERCISE  THEREOF;  TOGETHER 

WITH  THE  INDISPENSABLE  NECESSITY  OF  THE  SATISFACTION 

OF  CHRIST  FOR  THE  SALVATION  OF  SINNERS  IS  ESTABLISHED  AGAINST 

VARIOUS  CELEBRATED  WRITERS. 

NOW    Finsr    TR\NSLATED    FROM    THE    ORIGINAL    LATIN. 


A    RECOMMENDATORY    PREFACE 

BY  THE  REV.  JOHN  STAFFORD,  D.  D. 
AND  OTHERS. 


As  the  Publisher,  in  compliance  with  the  wishes  of  many  of  the  Subscribers  to  the 
Works  of  Dr.  Owen,  had  resolved  on  printing  the  following  Translation  of  his 
'  Diatriba  de  Justicia  Divina,'  no  place  in  the  series  appeared  more  suitable  and  con- 
venient than  the  present.  The  translation  was  made  by  a  Mr.  Hajiiltok.  Mr. 
ORME.inhisMeinoirsof  Dr. Owen, pronounces  ittobe, 'onthe  whole,  well  executed, 
but  ratlier  too  literal.'  I  have  retained  the  recommendatory  Preface  and  the  Trans- 
lator's Notes. — Editor. 


TO   THE   PUBLIC. 


The  numerous  and  valuable  writings  of  Dr.  Owen, 
have  long  ago,  secured  his  praise  in  all  the  churches, 
as  a  first-rate  writer  upon  theological  subjects. 
Any  recommendation,  therefore,  of  the  present  work, 
seems  unnecessary.  As  the  Treatise,  however,  now 
offered  to  the  public,  has  long  been  locked  up  in  a 
dead  language,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  say,  what 
will  be  granted  by  all  competent  judges,  that  the 
author  discovers  an  uncommon  acquaintance  with 
his  subject ;  that  he  has  clearly  explained  the  na- 
ture of  Divine  Justice,  and  demonstrated  it  to  be, 
not  merely  an  arbitrary  thing,  depending  upon  the 
sovereign  pleasure  of  the  Supreme  Lawgiver,  but  es- 
sential to  the  divine  nature.  In  doing  this,  he  has 
overthrown  the  arguments  of  the  Socinians  and 
others  against  the  atonement  of  Christ,  and  proved, 
that  a  complete  satisfaction  to  the  law  and  justice 
of  God  was  necessary,  in  order  that  sinners  might 
be  pardoned,  justified,  sanctified,  and  eternally 
saved,  consistently  with  the  honour  of  all  the  divine 
perfections. 

Whoever  makes  himself  master  of  the  doctor's 
reasoning  in  the  following  treatise,  will  be  able  to 
answer  all  the  objections  and  cavils  of  the  enemies 
of  the  truth  therein  contended  for.  It  is  therefore, 
earnestly  recommended  to  the  attention,  and  careful 
perusal  of  all,  who  wish  to  obtain  right  ideas  of  God, 


CCCXXll  TO    THE    PUBLIC. 

the  nature  and  extent  of  the  divine  law,  the  horrid 
nature  and  demerit  of  sin,  &c.  but  especially  to  the 
attention  of  young  divines.  The  translation  upon 
the  whole,  is  faithful.  If  it  have  any  fault,  it  is  per- 
haps its  being  too  literal. 

That  it  may  meet  with  that  reception  which  it 
justly  merits  from  the  public,  and  which  the  im- 
portance of  the  subject  demands,  is  the  earnest 
prayer  of  the  servants  in  the  gospel  of  Christ, 

S.  STAFFORD,  D.  D. 
J.  RYLAND,  sen.  M.  A. 
ROB.  SIMPSON. 


THE 

PREFACE  TO  THE  READER. 


As  perhaps,  learned  reader,  you  will  think  it  strange, 
that  I,  who  have  such  abundance  of  various  and  la- 
borious employment  of  another  kind,  should  think 
of  publishing  such  a  work  as  this  ;  it  may  not  be  im- 
proper to  lay  before  you  a  summary  account  of  the 
reasons  that  induced  me  to  this  undertaking :  and  I 
do  it  the  rather,  that  this  little  production  may  escape 
free  from  the  injurious  suspicions,  which  the  manners 
of  the  times  are  but  too  apt  to  affix  to  works  of  this 
kind.  It  is  now  four  months  and  upwards,  since  in 
the  usual  course  of  duty  in  defending  certain  theolo- 
gical theses  in  our  university,  it  fell  to  my  lot,  to 
discourse  and  dispute  on  the  vindicatory  justice  of 
God,  and  the  necessity  of  its  exercise,  on  the  sup- 
position of  the  existence  of  sin.  Although  these  ob- 
servations were  directed  to  the  best  of  my  abilities 
immediately  against  the  Socinians,  yet,  it  being  un- 
derstood that  many  very  respectable  theologians  en- 
tertained sentiments  on  this  subject  very  different 
from  mine,  and  although  the  warmest  opposers  of 
what  we  then  maintained  were  obliged  to  acknow- 
ledge that  our  arguments  are  quite  decisive  against 
the  adversaries,  yet  there  were  not  wanting  some 
who  not  altogether  agreeing  with  us,  employed  them- 
selves in  strictures  upon  our  opinion,  and  accused 
it  of  error,  while  others  continued  wavering,  and  in 
the  diversity  of  opinions,  knew  not  on  which  to  fix. 
Much  controversy  ensuing  in  consequence  of  this,  I 
agreed  with  some  learned  men  to  enter,  both  in  writ- 
ings and  conversation  upon  an  orderly  and  deliberate 


CCCXXIV  PREFACE. 

investigation  of  the  subject.  And  after  the  scruples 
of  several  had  been  removed  by  a  more  full  consider- 
ation of  our  opinion  (to  effect  which,  the  foUow^ing 
considerations  chiefly  contributed,  viz.  that  they 
clearly  saw  this  doctrine  conduced  to  the  establish- 
ment of  the  necessity  of  the  satisfaction  of  Jesus 
Christ,  a  precious  truth  which  these  worthy  and 
good  men,  partakers  of  the  grace  and  gift  of  righte- 
ousness through  means  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  not 
only  warmly  favoured,  but  dearly  venerated  as  the 
most  honourable  treasure  of  the  church,  the  seed  of 
a  blessed  immortality,  and  the  darling  jewel  of  our 
religion),  1  was  greatly  encouraged  in  the  confer- 
ences with  these  gentlemen  to  take  a  deeper  view  of 
the  subject,  and  to  examine  it  more  closely  for  the 
future  benefit  of  mankind. 

Besides  several  of  those  who  had  before  examin- 
ed, and  were  acquainted  with  our  sentiments,  or  to 
whom,  in  consequence  of  our  short  discourse  in  the 
university  on  the  subject,  they  began  to  be  more  ac- 
ceptable ;  and  these  too  considerable  both  for  their 
number  and  rank,  ceased  not  to  urge  me  to  a  more 
close  consideration  and  accurate  review  of  the  con- 
troversy.    For  in  that  public  dissertation,  it  being 
confined,  according  to  the  general  custom  of  such 
exercises  in  universities,  within  the  narrow  limits  of 
an  hour,  I  could  only  slightly  touch  on  the  nature  of 
vindicatory  justice ;  whereas  the  rules  and  limits  of 
such  exercises  would  not  permit  me  to  enter  on  the 
chief  point,  the  great  hinge  of  the  controversy,  viz. 
concerning  the  necessary  exercise  of  that  justice: 
this  is  the  difficulty  that  requires  the  abilities  of  the 
most  judicious  and  acute  to  investigate  and  solve.     In 
this  situation  of  matters,  not  only  a  more  full  view  of 
the  whole  state  of  the  controversy,  but  likewise  of  the 
weight  of  those  arguments  on  which  the  truth  of  that 


PREFACE.  CCCXXV 

side  of  the  question  which  we  have  espoused  de- 
pends, as  also  an  explanation  and  confutation  of  cer- 
tain subtleties,  whereby  the  opponents  had  embar- 
rassed the  minds  of  some  inquirers  after  truth,  be- 
came objects  of  general  request.  And,  indeed,  such 
were  the  circumstances  of  this  controversy,  that  any 
one  might  easily  perceive  that  a  scholastic  disserta- 
tion on  the  subject  must  take  a  very  different  turn, 
and  could  bear  no  farther  resemblance,  and  owe  no- 
thing more  to  the  former  exercise  than  the  having 
furnished  an  opportunity,  or  occasion,  for  its  appear- 
ance in  public. 

Although  then  I  was  more  than  sufficiently  full 
of  employment  already,  yet,  being  excited  by  the  en- 
couragement of  good  men,  and  fully  persuaded  in  my 
own  mind,  that  the  truth  which  we  embrace,  is  so 
far  from  being  of  trivial  consequence  in  our  religion, 
that  it  is  intimately  connected  with  many,  the  most 
important  articles  of  the  Christian  doctrine  concern- 
ing the  attributes  of  God,  the  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
and  the  nature  of  sin,  and  of  our  obedience ;  and  that 
it  strikes  its  roots  deep  through  almost  the  whole  of 
theology,  or  the  acknowledging  of  the  truth,  which 
is  according  to  godliness ;  fully  persuaded,  I  say,  of 
these  facts,  I  prevailed  with  myself,  rather  than  this 
doctrine  should  remain  any  longer  neglected  or  bu- 
ried, and  hardly  even  known  by  name ;  or  be  held 
captive  by  the  reasonings  of  some  enslaving  the  minds 
of  mankind, '  through  philosophy  and  vain  conceits,' 
to  exert  my  best  abilities  in  its  declaration  and  de- 
fence.    Several  things,  however,  which,  with  your 
good  leave,  reader,  I  shall  now  mention,  almost  de- 
terred me  from  the  task  when  begun  :  the  first  and 
chief  was  the  great  difficulty  of  the  subject  itself, 
which  among  the  more  abstruse  points  of  truth,  is  by 
no  means  the  least  abstruse.     For,  as  every  divine 


CCCXXVl  PREFACE. 


truth  has  a  peculiar  majesty  and  reverence  belong - 
mg  to  it,  which  debars  from  the  spiritual  knowledge 
of  it  (as  it  is  in  Christ),  the  ignorant  and  unstable  ; 
that  is,  those  who  are  not  taught  of  God,  or  become 
subject  to  the  truth  ;  so  those  points  which  dwell  in 
more  intimate  recesses,  and  approach  nearer  its  im- 
mense fountain,  the  'Father  of  light,'  darting  brighter 
rays,  by  their  excess  of  light,  present  a  confounding 
darkness  to  the  minds  of  the  greatest  men,  and  are  as 
darkness  to  the  eyes  breaking  forth  amidst  so  great 
light.  For  what  we  call  darkness  in  divine  subjects, 
is  nothing  else  than  their  celestial  glory  and  splendour 
striking  on  the  weak  ball  of  our  eyes,  the  rays  of 
which  we  are  not  able,  in  this  life,  which  '  is  but  a  va- 
pour, and  which  shineth  but  for  a  little,'  to  bear. 
Hence  God  himself,  who  is  '  light,  and  in  whom  there 
is  no  darkness  at  all,  who  dwelleth  in  light  inacces- 
sible ;  and  who  clotheth  himself  with  light  as  with 
a  garment ;'  in  respect  of  us,  is  said,  *  to  have  made 
darkness  his  pavilion.' 

Not,  as  the  Roman  Catholics  say,  that  there  is 
any  reason  that  we  should  blasphemously  accuse  the 
Holy  Scriptures  of  obscurity;  'for  the  law  of  the 
Lord  is  perfect,  converting  the  soul :  the  testimony 
of  the  Lord  is  sure,  making  wise  the  simple.  The 
statutes  of  the  Lord  are  right,  rejoicing  the  heart; 
the  commandment  of  the  Lord  is  pure,  enlightening 
the  eyes.'  Nor  is  there  reason  to  complain  that  any 
one  part  of  the  truth  hath  been  too  sparingly  or  ob- 
scurely revealed  :  for  even  the  smallest  portion  of 
the  divine  word  is,  by  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
assisting  to  dispose  and  frame  the  subject,  or  our 
hearts,  so  as  to  view  the  bright  object  of  divine  truth 
in  its  proper  and  spiritual  light,  sufficient  to  commu- 
nicate the  knowledge  of  truths  of  the  last  importance: 
for,  it  is  owing  to  the  nature  of  the  doctrines  them- 


PREFACE.  CCCXXVll 

selves,  and  their  exceeding  splendour,  that  there  are 
some  things  hard  to  be  conceived  and  interpreted, 
and  which  surpass  our  capacity  and  comprehension. 
Whether  this  article  of  divine  truth,  which  we  are 
now  inquiring  into,  be  not  akin  to  those  which  we 
have  now  mentioned,  let  the  learned''  judge  and  de- 
termine.     I  have,  therefore,  determined  to  place  my 
chief  dependance  on  his  aid,  '  who  giveth  to  all  libe- 
rally and  upbraideth  none.'     For  those  unhappy  gen- 
tlemen only  lose  their  labour,  and  may  not  improperly 
be  compared  to  the  artists,  who  used  more  than  com- 
mon exertions  in  building  Noah's''  ark,  and  who,  like 
bees,  work  for  others,  and  not  for  themselves,  in  the 
search  of  truth,  who,  relying  on  their  own  abilities 
and  industry,  use  every  effort  to  ascertain  and  com- 
prehend divine  truths,  while  at  the  same  time,  they 
continue  regardless,  whether  'he  who  commanded 
the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  hath  hitherto  shone 
into  their  hearts,  to  give  them  the  light  of  the  know- 
ledge of  his  glory,  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ:'  for, 
after  all,  they  can  accomplish  nothing  more,  by  their 
utmost  efforts,  but  to  discover  their  technical  or  ar- 
tificial ignorance. 

Setting  aside  then  the  consideration  of  some 
phrases,  and  even  of  some  arguments;  yet,  as  to 
what  relates  to  the  principal  point  of  the  contro- 
versy, I  hold  myself  bound  in  conscience  and  in  ho- 
nour, not  even  to  imagine  that  I  have  attained  a  pro- 
per knowledge  of  any  one  article  of  truth,  much  less 
to  publish  it,  unless  through  the  Holy  Spirit  I  have 
had  such  a  taste  of  it,  in  its  spiritual  sense,  as  that  I 
may  be  able,  from  the  heart,  to  say,  with  the  psalm- 
s' Especially  those,  says  the  autllor,^^ho  shall  reflect  what  a  close  connexion  there 
is  between  it,  and  the  whole  doctrine  concerning  the  nature  of  God,  the  satisfaction 
of  Christ,  the  desert  of  sin,  and  every  one  of  the  dark  and  more  abstruse  heads  of 
our  religion. 

^  Thereby  hastening  their  own  destruction. 


CCCXXVlll  PREFACE. 

ist,  *  I  have  believed,  and  therefore  have  I  spoken.' 
He,  who  in  the  investigation  of  truth,  makes  it  his 
chief  care  to  have  his  mind  and  will  rendered  subject 
to  the  faith,  and  obedient  to  the  Father  of  lights,  and 
who  with  attention  waits  upon  him,  whose  throne  is 
in  the  heavens;  he  alone  attains  to  true  wisdom, 
the  others  walk  in  a  vain  shew.  It  has  then  been 
my  principal  object,  in  tracing  the  depths  and  secret 
nature  of  the  subject  in  question,  while  I  a  poor  worm 
contemplated  the  majesty  and  glory  of  him,  concern- 
ing whose  perfections  I  was  treating,  to  attend  and 
obey  with  all  humility  and  reverence,  what  the 
great  God,  the  Lord  hath  spoken  in  his  word :  not 
at  all  doubting,  but  that  whatever  way  he  should  in- 
cline my  heart  by  the  power  of  his  Spirit  and  truth,  I 
should  be  enabled,  in  a  dependance  on  his  aid,  to 
bear  the  contradictions  of  a  false  knowledge,  and  all 
human  and  philosophical  arguments. 

And  to  say  the  truth,  as  I  have  adopted  the  opi- 
nion which  I  defend  in  this  dissertation,  from  no  re- 
gard to  the  arguments  of  either  one  or  another 
learned  man,  and  much  less  from  any  slavish  attach- 
ment to  authority,  example,  or  traditionary  preju- 
dices, and  from  no  confidence  in  the  opinion,  or  abi- 
lities of  others  ;  but,  as  I  hope,  from  a  most  humble 
contemplation  of  the  holiness,  purity,  justice,  right, 
dominion,  wisdom,  and  mercy  of  God ;  so  by  the 
guidance  of  his  Spirit  alone,  and  power  of  his  heart- 
changing  grace,  filling  my  mind  with  all  the  fulness 
of  truth,  and  striking  me  with  a  deep  awe  and  admi- 
ration of  it,  I  have  been  enabled  to  surmount  the  dif- 
ficulty of  the  research.  Theology  is  the  '  wisdom 
that  is  from  above,'  a  habit  of  grace  and  spiritual  gifts, 
the  manifestation  of  the  Spirit  reporting  what  is  con- 
ducive to  happiness.  It  is  not  a  science  to  be  learned 
from  the  precepts  of  man,  or  from  the  rules  of  arts. 


PREFACE.  CCCXXIX 


or  method  of  other  sciences,  as  those  represent  it, 
who  also  maintain  that  a  natural  man  may  attain  all 
that  artificial  and  methodical  theology,  even  though 
in  the  matters  of  God,  and  mysteries  of  the  gospel, 
he  be  blinder  than  a  mole.  What  a  distinguished 
theologian  must  he  be,  '  whoreceiveth  not  the  things 
of  the  Spirit  of  God  !' 

But  again,  having  sailed  through  this  sea  of  trou- 
bles, and  being  ready  to  launch  out  upon  the  subject, 
that  gigantic  spectre,  '  It  is  every  where  spoken 
against,'  should  have  occasioned  me  no  delay,  had 
it  not  come  forth  inscribed  with  the  mighty  names 
of  Augustine,  Calvin,  Musculus,  Twiss,  and  Vossius. 
And  although  I  could  not  but  entertain  for  these 
divines  that  honour  and  respect  which  is  due  to  such 
great  names,  yet,  partly  by  considering  myself  as 
entitled  to  'that  freedom  wherewith  Christ  hath 
made  us  free,'  and  partly  by  opposing  to  these,  the 
names  of  other  very  learned  theologians,  viz.  Parens, 
Piscator,  Molineus,  Lubertus,  Rivetus,  Cameron, 
Maccovius,  Junius,  and  others,  who,  after  the  spread- 
ing of  the  poison  of  Socinianism,  have  with  great  ac- 
curacy and  caution  investigated  and  cleared  up  this 
truth,  I  easily  got  rid  of  any  uneasiness  from  that 
quarter. 

Having  thus  surmounted  these  difficulties,  and 
begun  the  undertaking  by  devoting  to  it  a  few  leisure 
hours  stolen  from  other  engagements,  the  work  pros- 
pered boyond  all  expectation  ;  and  by  the  favour  of 
the  'Father  of  lights,  who  worketh  in  us  both  to  will 
and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure,'  in  a  few  days  it  was 
brought  to  a  conclusion. 

And  now  that  the  labour  of  composing  was  ended,  I 
again  entertained  doubts,  and  continued  for  some  time 
in  suspense,  whether,  considering  the  manners  of  the 
times  in  which  we  live,  it  would  not  be  more  prudent 

VOL.    IX.  Z 


CCCXXX  PREFACE. 

to  throw  the  papers,  with  some  other  kindred  com- 
positions, on  other  subjects  of  divinity,  into  some 
secret  coffers,  there  to  be  buried  in  eternal  oblivion, 
than  bring  them  forth  to  public  discussion. 

For  even  all  know,  with  what  vain  arrogance, 
malice,  party-spirit,  and  eager  lust  of  attacking  the 
labours  of  others,  the  minds  of  many  are  corrupted 
and  infected.  Not  only  then  was  it  necessary,  that 
I  should  anticipate  and  digest  in  my  mind  the  con- 
tempt and  scoffings,  which  these  bantering,  saucy, 
dull-witted,  self-sufficient  despisers  of  others,  or 
any  of  such  a  contemptible  race,  whose  greatest 
pleasure  it  is  to  disparage  all  kinds  of  exertions,  how- 
ever praiseworthy,  might  pour  out  against  me ;  but 
I  likewise  foresaw,  that  I  should  have  to  contend 
with  the  soured  tempers  and  prejudiced  opinions  of 
others,  who  being  carried  away  by  party-zeal,  and 
roused  by  the  unexpected  state  and  condition  of 
public  ^  affairs,  and  who  thinking  themselves  to  be 
the  men,  and  that  wisdom  was  born  and  will  die 
with  them,  look  down  with  contempt  upon  all  who 
differ  from  them ;  and  not  with  these  only,  but  I 
likewise  knew,  that  I  had  a  more  severe  scrutiny  to 
undergo  from  some  learned  men,  to  whom,  it  was 
easy  to  conjecture  this  work,  for  many  reasons  would 
not  be  acceptable.  For  there  are  some  by  whom 
all  labour  employed  in  the  search  of  any  more  ob- 
scure or  difficult  truth,  is  accounted  as  misemployed  : 
nor  do  these  want  the  ingenuity  of  assigning  honour- 
able pretences  for  their  indolence.  I  should  how- 
ever be  ashamed  to  enter  into  any  serious  argument 
with  such,  nor  is  it  worth  while  to  enter  upon  a  re- 
view of  their  long  declamations.  And  although 
these  and  many  other  things  of  such  a  kind,  may  ap- 
pear grievous  and  hard  to  be  borne  to  your  dainty 

'•  This  treatise  was  written  in  the  time  of  the  CoHJinomvealth. 


PREFACE.  CCCXXXl 


gentlemen,  who  eagerly  court  splendour  and  fame ; 
yet,  ingenuously  to  say  the  truth,  I   am  very  fully 
persuaded,  that  no  man  can  either  think  or  speak  of 
me  and  my  works,  with  so  much  disregard  and  con- 
tempt, as  I   myself,  from  my  soul  both  think  and 
speak  ;  and  having  in  no  respect  any  other  expecta- 
tion than  that  of  contempt  to  myself  and  name,  pro- 
vided divine  truth  be  promoted,  all  these  considera- 
tions had  long  ago  become  not  only  of  small  conse- 
quence to  me,  but  appeared  as  the  merest  trifles. 
For  why  should  we  be  anxious  about  what  shall  be- 
come either  of  ourselves  or   our  names  :    if  only  we 
*  commend  our  souls  to  God  as  to  a  faithful  Creator  in 
well-doing,'  and  by  continuing  in  well-doing,  *  stop 
the  mouth  of  ignorant  bablers.'     God  careth  for  us  : 
'  Let  us  cast  our  burdens  upon  him,  and  he  will  sus- 
tain us.'     Let  but  the  truth  triumph,  vanquish,  rout, 
and  put  to  flight  its  enemies.     '  Let  the  word  of  the 
cross  have  free  course  and  be  glorified.'     Let  wretch- 
ed sinners  learn  daily  more  and  more  '  of  fellowship 
with  Christ  in  his  sufferings  ;'  of  the  necessity  of  sa- 
tisfaction for  sins,  by  the  blood  of  the  Son  of  God, 
so  '  that  he  who  is  white  and  ruddy,  and  the  chiefest 
among  ten  thousand,  may  appear  so  to  them,  yea, 
altogether  lovely ;'  till  being  admitted  into  the  cham- 
bers of  the  Church's  husband,  '  they  drink  love  that 
is  better  than  wine,  and  become  a  willing  people  in 
the  day  of  his  power,  and  in  the  beauty  of  holiness  ;' 
and  I  shall  very  little  regard,  '  being  judged  of  man's 
judgment.' 

Since  then,  I  not  only  have  believed  what  I  have 
spoken,  but  as  both  my  own  heart,  and  God  who  is 
greater  than  my  heart,  are  witnesses,  that  I  have  en- 
gaged in  this  labour  for  the  truth,  under  the  influence 
of  the  most  sacred  regard  and  reverence,  for  the  ma- 
jesty, purity,  holiness,  justice,  grace,  and  mercy  of 


CCCXXXll  PREFACE. 

God,  from  a  detestation  of  that  abominable  thing 
which  his  soul  hateth ;  and  with  a  heart  inflamed 
with  zeal  for  the  honour  and  glory  of  our  dearest  Sa- 
viour Jesus  Christ,  who  is  fairer  than  the  sons  of 
men  and  altogether  lovely,  whom  with  my  soul  and 
all  that  is  within  me  I  worship,  love,  and  adore,  whose 
glorious  coming  I  wish  and  long  for  ( 'come  Lord 
Jesus,  come  quickly'),  for  '  whose  sake  I  count  all 
things  but  as  loss  and  dung;'  since,  I  say,  I  have  en- 
gaged in  this  labour  from  these  motives  alone,  I  am 
under  no  anxiety  or  doubt,  but  it  will  meet  with  a 
favourable  reception  from  impartial  judges,  from 
those  acquainted  with  the  terrors  of  the  Lord,  the 
curse  of  the  law,  the  virtue  of  the  cross,  the  power 
of  the  gospel,  and  the  riches  of  the  glory  of  divine 
grace. 

There  are,  no  doubt,  many  other  portions  and 
subjects  of  our  religion,  of  that  blessed  trust  com- 
mitted to  us  for  our  instruction,  on  which  we  might 
dwell  with  greater  pleasure  and  satisfaction  of  mind. 
Such  I  mean  as  afford  a  more  free  and  wider  scope 
of  ranging,  through  the  most  pleasant  meads  of  the 
Holy  Scripture,  and  contemplating  in  these  the  trans- 
parent fountains  of  life,  and  rivers  of  consolation : 
subjects  which  unencumbered  by  the  thickets  of 
scholastic  terms  and  distinctions,  unembarassed  by 
the  impediments  and  sophisms  of  an  enslaving  phi- 
losophy or  false  knowledge,  sweetly  and  pleasantly 
lead  into  a  pure,  unmixed,  and  delightful  fellowship 
with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son,  shedding  abroad 
in  the  heart,  the  inmost  loves  of  our  beloved,  with 
the  odour  of  his  sweet  ointment  poured  forth. 
-  This  truth  likewise  has  its  uses,  and  such  as  are 
of  the  greatest  importance  to  those  who  are  walking 
in  the  way  of  holiness  and  evangelical  obedience.  A 
brief  specimen  and  abstract  of  them  is  added,  for  the 


PREFACE,  CCGXXXlll 

benefit  of  the  pious  reader,  in  the  end  of  the  disser- 
tation, in  order  to  excite  his  love  towards  our  beloved 
High  Priest  and  Chief  Shepherd,  and  true  fear  to- 
wards God,  '  who  is  a  consuming  fire,' and  whom  we 
cannot  serve  acceptably,  unless  with  '  reverence  and 
godly  fear.' 

There  can  be  no  doubt,  but  that  many  points  of 
doctrine  still  remain,  on  which  the  labours  of  the 
godly  and  learned  may  be  usefully  employed.  For, 
although  many  reverend  and  learned  divines,  both 
of  the  present  and  former  age,  have  composed  from 
the  Sacred  Writings  a  synopsis,  or  methodical  body 
of  doctrine,  or  heavenly  truth,  and  published  their 
compositions  under  various  titles ;  and,  although 
other  theological  writings,  catechistical,  dogmatical, 
exegetical,  casuistical,  and  polemical,  have  increased 
to  such  a  mass,  that  the  *  world  can  hardly  contain 
the  works  that  have  been  written  ;'  yet,  such  is  the 
nature  of  divine  truth,  so  deep  and  inexhaustible  the 
fountain  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  whence  we  draw 
it,  so  innumerable  the  salutary  remedies  and  anti- 
dotes proposed  in  these  to  dispel  all  the  poisons  and 
temptations  wherewith  the  adversary  can  ever  at- 
tack either  the  minds  of  the  pious,  or  the  peace  of 
the  church,  and  the  true  doctrine,  that  serious  and 
thinking  men  can  entertain  no  doubt,  but  that  we 
perform  a  service  praiseworthy  and  profitable  to 
the  church  of  Christ,  when,  under  the  direction  of 
*  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  and  revelation,'  we  bring  for- 
ward, explain,  and  defend  the  most  important  and 
necessary  articles  of  evangelical  truth. 

But,  to  be  more  particular  :  how  sparingly,  for 
instance,  yea,  how  obscurely,  how  confusedly,  is  the 
whole  economy  of  the  Spirit  towards  believers  (one 
of  the  greatest  mysteries  of  our  religion;  a  most  in- 
valuable portion  of  the  salvation  brought  about  for 


CCCXXXIV  PREFACE. 

US  by  Christ),  described  by  divines  in  general  ?  Or 
rather,  by  the  most,  is  it  not  altogether  neglected  ? 
In  their  catechisms,  common-place  books,  public  and 
private  theses,  systems,  compends,  &c.  and  even,  in 
their  commentaries,  harmonies,  and  expositions,  con- 
cerning the  indwelling,  sealing  testimony,  unction, 
and  consolation  of  the  Spirit.  Good  God  !  con- 
cerning this  inestimable  fruit  of  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  Jesus  Christ !  This  invaluable  treasure  of 
the  godly,  though  copiously  revealed  and  explained 
in  the  Scriptures,  there  is  almost  a  total  silence. 
And,  with  regard  to  union  and  communion  with 
Christ,  and  with  his  Father,  and  our  Father,  and 
some  other  doctrines  respecting  his  person,  as  the 
husband  and  head  of  the  church,  the  same  obser- 
vation holds  good. 

For  almost,  from  the  very  period  in  which  they 
were  capable  of  judging  even  of  the  first  princi- 
ples of  religion,  the  orthodox  have  applied  them- 
selves to  clear  up  and  explain  those  articles  of  the 
truth,  which  Satan,  by  his  various  artifices,  hath 
endeavoured  to  darken,  pervert,  or  undermine.  But 
as  there  is  no  part  of  divine  truth,  which,  since  the 
eternal  and  sworn  enmity  took  place  between  him 
and  the  seed  of  the  woman,  he  hath  not  opposed 
with  all  his  might,  fury,  and  cunning ;  so  he  hath 
not  thought  proper,  wholly  to  entrust  the  success  of 
his  interest  to  instruments  delegated  from  among 
mankind,  though  many  of  them  seem  to  have  disco- 
vered such  a  wonderful  promptitude,  alacrity,  and 
zeal,  in  transacting  his  business,  that  one  would 
think  they  had  been  formed  and  fashioned  for  the 
purpose  ;  but  he  hath  reserved  for  that  power  which 
he  hath  over  darkness  and  all  kind  of  wickedness,  a 
certain  portion  of  his  work  to  be  administered  in  a 
peculiar  manner  by  himself.     And,  as  he  has,  in  all 


PREFACE.  CCCXXXV 

ages,  reaped  an  abundant  crop  of  tares  from  that  part 
of  his  Lordship  which  he  hired  out  to  be  improved 
by  man,  though  from  the  nature  of  human  affairs, 
not  without  much  noise,  tumult,  blood,  and  slaughter; 
so  from  that  which  he  thought  proper  to  manage 
himself,  without  any  delegated  assistance,  he  has 
received  a  more  abundant  and  richer  crop  of  infernal 
fruit. 

The  exertions  of  Satan  against  the  truth  of  the 
gospel  may  be  distinguished  into  two  divisions.  In 
the  first,  as  the  god  of  this  world,  he  endeavours 
to  darken  the  minds  of  unbelievers,  '  that  the  light 
of  the  glorious  gospel  of  Christ  may  not  shine  into 
them.'  With  what  success  he  exercises  this  soul- 
destroying  employment  we  cannot  pretend  to  say  ; 
but  there  is  reason  to  lament  that  he  hath  succeeded, 
and  still  succeeds,  beyond  his  utmost  hope.  In  the 
other,  he  carries  on  an  implacable  war,  an  unremit- 
ting strife,  not  as  formerly  with  Michael  about  the 
body  of  Moses,  but  about  the  Spirit  of  Christ;  about 
some  of  the  more  distinguished  articles  of  the  truth, 
and  the  application  of  each  of  them,  in  order  to  cul- 
tivate communion  with  God  the  Father  and  with  his 
Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  against  the  hearts  of  the 
godly,  and  the  new  creature  formed  within  them. 

In  this  situation  of  affairs,  most  Christian  writers 
have  made  it  their  study  to  oppose  that  first  effort  of 
the  devil,  whereby,  through  means  of  his  instruments, 
he  openly  endeavours  to  suppress  the  light,  both  na- 
tural and  revealed  ;  but  they  have  not  been  equally 
solicitous  to  succour  the  minds  of  believers,  '  when 
wrestling,  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  against 
principalities  and  powers,  against  the  rulers  of  the 
darkness  of  this  world,  against  spirits  of  wickedness 
in  high  places,'  and  almost  ready  to  sink  under  the 
contest.     Hence,  I  say,  a  very  minute  investigation 


CCCXXXVl  PREFACE. 

hath  been  set  on  foot  by  many,  of  those  articles  of  re- 
ligion which  he  has  openly,  through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  the  slaves  of  error  and  darkness,  attacked,  and 
the  vindication  of  them  made  clear  and  plain.  But 
those,  which,  both  from  their  relation  to  practice,  and 
a  holy  communion  full  of  spiritual  joy,  to  be  cultivated 
with  God,  the  old  serpent  hath  reserved  for  his  own 
attack  in  the  hearts  of  believers,  most  writers,  partly 
either  because  they  were  ignorant  of  his  wiles,  or  partly 
because  they  saw  not  much  evil  publicly  arising  thence, 
and  partly  because  the  arguments  of  the  adversary  were 
not  founded  on  any  general  principle,  but  only  to  be 
deduced  from  the  private  and  particular  state  and  case 
of  individuals,  have  either  passed  over,  or  very  slightly 
touched  upon. 

As  to  what  pertains  to  theology  itself,  or  that  *  know- 
ledge of  the  truth  which  is  according  to  godliness,' 
wherewith  being  filled,  '  we  ourselves  become  pure  and 
perfected  to  every  good  work,'  and  fit  ministers  of  the 
New  Testament,  '  not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  Spirit, 
apt  to  teach,  rightly  dividing  the  word  of  truth ;'  that 
subject,  I  say,  though  a  common  and  chief  topic  in  the 
writings  both  of  the  schoolmen  and  others  on  religion, 
many  have  acknowledged  to  their  fatal  experience, 
when  too  late,  is  treated  in  too  perplexed  and  intri- 
cate a  manner  to  be  of  any  real  and  general  service. 

For  while  they  are  warmly  employed  in  disputing, 
whether  theology  be  an  art  or  a  science,  and  whether 
it  be  a  speculative  or  practical  art  or  science  ?  And 
while  they  attempt  to  measure  it  exactly  by  those  rules, 
laws,  and  methods,  which  human  reason  has  devised 
for  other  sciences,  thus  endeavouring  to  render  it  more 
plain  and  clear,  they  find  themselves,  to  the  grief  and 
sorrow  of  many  candidates  for  the  truth,  entangled 
in  inextricable  difficulties,  and  left  in  possession  only 
of  a  human  system  of  doctrines,  having  little  or  no 


PREFACE.  CCCXXXVU 

connexion  at  all  with  true  theology.    I  hope,   therefore, 

*  if  I  live  and  the  Lord  will,'  to  publish,  but  from  no 
desire  of  gainsaying  any  one,  some  specimens  of  evan- 
gelical truth  on  the  points  before-mentioned,  as  well  as 
on  other  subjects." 

As  to  the  work  that  I  have  now  in  hand,  the  first 
part  of  the  dissertation  is,  concerning  the  cause  of  the 
death  of  Christ ;  and  in  the  execution  of  which  I  have 
the  greatest  pleasure  and  satisfaction  (though  proudly 
defied  by  the  adversaries,  so  conceited  with  themselves 
and  their  productions  are  they),  because  '  I  have  de- 
termined to  know  nothing  but  Jesus  Christ  and  him 
crucified :'  at  least,  nothing  that  could  divert  my  at- 
tention from  that  subject. 

But  now,  learned   reader,   lest,  as  the   saying  is, 

*  the  gate  should  become  wider  than  the  city,'  if  you 
will  bear  with  me,  while  I  say  a  few  things  of  myself, 
however  little  worthy  of  your  notice,  I  shall  immedi- 
ately conclude  the  preface. 

About  two  years  ago,  the  parliament  of  the  com- 
monwealth promoted  me,  while  diligently  employed, 
according  to  the  measure  of  the  gift  of  grace  bestowed 
on  me,  in  preaching  the  gospel,  by  their  authority  and 
influence,  though  with  reluctance  on  my  part,  to  a  chair 
in  the  very  celebrated  university  of  Oxford.  I  mean 
not  to  relate  what  various  employments  fell  to  my  lot 
from  that  period  :  what  frequent  journeys  I  became  en- 
gaged in  ;  not,  indeed,  expeditions  of  pleasure,  or  on 
my  own  or  private  account ;  but  such  as  the  unavoid- 
able necessities  of  the  university,  and  the  commands 
of  superiors,  whose  authority  was  not  to  be  gainsaid, 
imposed  upon  me.  And  now  I  clearly  found,  that  I, 
who  dreaded  almost  every  academical  employment, 
as  being  unequal  to  the  task,*^  and  at  a  time  too  when  I 

^  See  Owen  on  the  Spirit. 
'  '  For  what/  sa^s  our  author,  in  a  long  parenthesis, '  could  be  expected  from  a 


CCCXXXVIU  PREFACE. 

had  entertained  hope,  that  through  the  goodness  of 
God,  in  giving  me  leisure  and  retirement,  and  strength 
for  study,  that  the  deficiency  of  genius  and  penetration, 
might  be  made  up  by  industry  and  diligence,  was  now 
so  circumstanced  that  the  career  of  my  studies  must  be 
interrupted  by  more  and  greater  impediments  than  ever 
before. 

For,  to  mention  first,  what  certainly  is  most  weighty 
and  important,  the  task  of  lecturing  in  public  was  put 
upon  me,  which  would  strictly  and  properly  require 
the  whole  time  and  attention  even  of  the  most  grave 
and  experienced  divine  ;  and  in  the  discharge  of  which, 
unless  I  had  been  greatly  assisted  and  encouraged  by 
the  candour,  piety,  submission,  and  self-denial  of  the 
auditors  ;  and  by  their  respect  for  the  divine  institution, 
and  their  love  of  the  truth,  with  every  kind  of  indul- 
gence and  kind  attention  towards  the  earthen  vessel, 
which  distinguish  most  academicians  of  every  rank, 
age,  and  description,  beyond  mankind  in  general;  I 
had  long  lost  all  hope  of  discharging  that  province, 
either  to  the  public  advantage,  or  my  own  private  sa- 
tisfaction and  comfort. 

And  as  most  of  them  are  endowed  with  a  pious 
disposition  and  Christian  temper,  and  well  furnished 
with  superior  gifts,  and  instructed  in  learning  of  every 
kind,  which  in  the  present  imperfect  and  depraved 
state  of  human  nature  is  apt  to  fill  the  minds  of  men 
with  prejudices  against  '  the  foolishness  of  preaching,' 
and  to  disapprove  '  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ,'  I 
should  be  the  most  ungrateful  of  mankind,  were  I  not 
to  acknowledge  that  the  humility,  diligence,  and  ala- 
crity with  which  they  attended  to,  and  obeyed  the  words 

man  not  far  advanced  in  years,  who  had  for  several  years  been  very  full  of  employ- 
ment, and  accustomed  only  to  the  popular  mode  of  speaking,  who  being  altogether 
devoted  to  the  investigation  and  explanation  of  the  saving  grace  of  God  through 
Jesus  Christ,  had  taken  leave  of  all  scholastic  studies,  whose  genius  is  by  no  means 
quick,  and  who  had  even  forgot,  in  some  measure,  the  portion  of  polite  learning  that 
he  might  have  formerly  acquired.' 


PREFACE.  CCCXXXIX 

of  the  cross,  indulging  neitlier  pride  of  heart,  nor  ani- 
mosity of  mind,  or  itching  of  ears,  though  dispensed  by 
a  most  unworthy  servant  of  God  in  the  gospel  of  his 
Son,  have  given,  and  still  give  me  great  courage  in  the 
discharge  of  the  diiferent  duties  of  my  office. 

However,  then,  the  most  merciful  Father  of  all 
things  shall,  in  his  infinite  wisdom  and  goodness  dis- 
pose of  the  affairs  of  our  university ;  I  could  not  but 
give  such  a  public^  testimony,  as  a  regard  to  truth  and 
duty  required  from  me,  to  these  very  respectable  and 
learned  men  (however  much  these  treacherous  calum- 
niators and  falsifying  sycophants  may  rail,  and  shew 
their  teeth  upon  the  occasion),  the  heads  of  the  colleges, 
who  have  merited  so  highly  of  the  church,  for  their 
distinguished  candour,  great  diligence,  uncommon  eru- 
dition, blameless  politeness  ;  many  of  whom  are  zea- 
lously studious  of  every  kind  of  literature,  and  many 
who  by  their  conduct  in  the  early  period  of  their  youth 
give  the  most  promising  hopes  of  future  merit :  so  that 
I  would  venture  to  affirm,  that  no  impartial  and  unpre- 
judiced judge  will  believe  that  our  university  hath 

S  Here  our  author  introduces  the  following  observation  in  a  very  long  parenthesis  : 
'  As  reports  are  every  where  spread  abroad,  concerning  the  abolition  and  destruction 
of  the  colleges,  and  efforts  for  that  purpose  made  by  some  who  being  entire 
strangers  to  every  kind  of  literature,  or  at  least  ignorant  of  every  thing  of  greater 
antiquity  than  what  their  own  memory,  or  that  of  their  fathers  can  reach,  and  re- 
gardless of  the  future,  imagine  the  whole  globe  and  bounds  of  human  knowledge  to 
be  contained  within  the  limits  of  their  own  little  cabins,  ignorant  whether  the  sun 
ever  shone  beyond  their  own  little  island  or  not,  neither  knowing  what  they  say,  nor 
of  whom  they  make  their  assertions;  and  by  others  who  are  deeply  sunk  in  the 
basest  of  crimes,  and  who  would  therefore  wish  all  light  distinguishing  between  good 
and  evil  entirely  extinguished.  '  For  evil  doers  hate  the  light,  nor  do  they  come  to 
the  light,  lest  their  deeds  should  appear;'  that  they  (mean  lurchers  hitherto)  may 
fill  up  the  measure  of  their  iniquity  with  some  kind  of  eclat ;  to  which  also  may  be 
added  those,  who  never  having  become  candidates  for  literature  themselves,  yet, by 
pushing  themselves  forward,  have  unseasonably  thrust  themselves  into  such  services 
and  offices,  as  necessarily  require  knowledge  and  learning  ;  these,  I  say,  like  the  fox 
who  had  lost  his  tail,  would  wish  all  the  world  deprived  of  the  means  of  knowledge, 
lest  their  own  shameful  ignorance,  despicable  indolence,  and  total  unfitness  for  the 
offices  which  they  solicit  or  hold,  should  appear  to  all  who  have  the  least  degree  of 
understanding  and  sense ;  and  lastly  too,  by  a  despicable  herd  of  prodigal  idle 
fellows,  eagerly  gaping  for  the  revenues  of  the  university.'  For  these  reasons,  our 
author  says,  he  could  not  but  give  the  above  character  of  the  heads  and  other  mem- 
bers of  that  venerable  body  :  a  character  which  both  the  truth  of  the  case,  and  the 
duty  of  his  office  required. 


CCCxl  PREFACE. 

either  been,  for  ages  past,  surpassed,  or  is  now  sur- 
passed, either  in  point  of  a  proper  respect  and  esteem 
for  piety,  for  the  saving  knowledg*e  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ ;  manners,  orderly,  and  w^orthy  of 
the  Christian  vocation;  and  for  a  due  regard  to  doc- 
trines, arts,  languages,  and  all  sciences  that  can  be  or- 
namental to  vv^ise,  w^orthy,  and  good  men,  appointed 
for  the  public  good,  by  any  society  of  men  in  the 
vrorld. 

Relying  then  on  the  humanity,  piety,  and  candour 
of  such  men  ('  w^ho  may  be  afflicted,  but  not  straitened; 
persecuted,  but  not  forsaken  ;  cast  down,  but  shall  not 
be  lost;'  who  carry  about  with  them  the  life  and  death 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ),  though  destitute  of  all 
strength  of  my  own,  and  devoting  myself  entirely  to 
him,  '  who  furnisheth  seed  to  the  sower  ;  and  who  from 
the  mouths  of  babes  and  sucklings  ordaineth  strength  ;' 
who  hath  appointed  Christ  a  perpetual  source  of  help, 
and  who  furnishes  a  seasonable  aid  to  every  pious  effort, 
I  have,  in  conjunction  with  my  very  learned  colleague," 
a  very  eminent  man,  and  whose  equal  in  the  work  of 
the  gospel,  if  the  parliament  of  the  commonwealth  had 
conjoined  with  him,  they  would  have  attended  to  the 
best  interests  of  the  university,  continued  in  the  dis- 
charge of  the  duties  of  this  laborious  and  difficult  pro- 
vince. 

But  not  on  this  account  alone,  would  I  have  been 
reluctant  to  return,  after  so  long  an  interval  of  time,  to 
this  darling  university.  But  another  care,  another 
office,  and  that  by  far  the  most  weighty,  was,  by  the 
concurring  voice  of  the  senate  of  the  university  ;  and 
notwithstanding  my  most  earnest  requests  to  the  con- 
trary, entrusted  and  assigned  to  me,  and  by  the  under- 
taking of  which,  I  have  knowingly  and  wittingly  corn- 
's Mr.  T.  Goodwin.  President  of  Magdalen  College. 


PREFACE.  CCCxli 

pounded  with  the  loss  of  my  peace,  and  all  my  studious 
''pursuits. 

Such,  candid  reader,  is  the  account  of  the  author 
of  the  following  little  treatise,  and  of  his  situation 
when  composing  it :  a  man  not  wise  in  the  estimation 
of  others,  in  his  own  very  foolish  ;  first  called  from 
rural  retirement  and  the  noise  of  arms  to  this  univer- 
sity, and  very  lately  again  returned  to  it  from  excur- 
sions in  the  cause  of  the  gospel,  not  only  to  the  extre- 
mities of  this  island,  but  to  coasts  beyond  the  seas,  and 
now  again  deeply  engaged  in  the  various  and  weighty 
duties  of  his  station  ;  whether  any  thing  exalted  or  re- 
fined can  be  expected  from  such  a  person,  is  easy  for 
any  one  to  determine. 

With  regard  to  our  manner  of  writing,  or  Latin 
diction,  as  some  are  wont  to  acquire  great  praise  from 
their  sublimity  of  expression,  allow  me  but  a  word  or 
two.  Know  then  reader,  that  you  have  to  do  with  a 
person,  who  provided  his  words,  but  clearly  express 
the  sentiments  of  his  mind,  entertains  a  fixed  and  abso- 
lute disregard  for  all  elegance  and  ornaments  of  speech. 
For, 

Dicite  Pontifices,  in  sacris  quid  facit  aurum? 

Say  Bishops,  of  what  avail  is  glitter  to  sacred  subjects  ? 

In  my  opinion  indeed,  he,  who  in  a  theological 
contest  should  please  himself  with  the  idea  of  display- 
ing rhetorical  flourishes,  would  derive  no  other  advan- 
tage therefrom,  but  that  his  head,  adorned  with  mag- 
nificent verbose  garlands  and  pellets,  would  fall  a  richer 
victim  to  the  criticisms  of  the  learned. 

But  whatever  shall  be  the  decision  of  the  serious 
and  judicious,  with  respect  to  this  treatise,  if  I  shall 
any  how  stir  up  an  emulation  in  others,  on  whom  the 

•>  In  the  year  1651,  Dr.  Owen  was  settled  in  the  deanery  of  Christ's  College ;  and 
in  1652  chosen  vice-chancellor  of  that  university. 


CCCxlii  PREFACE. 

grace  of  God  may  have  bestowed  more  excellent  gifts, 
to  bring  forward  to  public  utility  their  pure,  solid, 
and  learned  labours,  and  shall  excite  them  from  their 
light,  to  confer  light  on  the  splendour  of  this  univer- 
sity, I  shall  be  abundantly  gratified.  Farewell,  pious 
reader,  and  think  not  lightly  of  him,  who  hath  used  his 
most  zealous  endeavours  to  serve  thy  interest  in  the 
cause  of  the  gospel. 

JOHN  OWEN. 


A 

DISSERTATION 

ON 

DIVINE     JUSTICE, 


CHAP.  I. 

The  introduction.  The  design  of  the  work.  Atheists.  The  prolepsis^  of 
divine  justice  general.  The  divisions  of  justice,  according  to  Aristotle. 
The  sentiments  of  the  schoohnen  respecting  these.  Another  division. 
Justice  considered  absolutely.     Then  iti  various  respects. 

In  this  treatise,  we  are  to  discourse  of  God  and  of  his  jus- 
tice, the  most  illustrious  of  all  the  divine  perfections;  but 
especially  of  his''  vindicatory  justice;  of  the  certainty  of 
which,  I  most  firmly  believe  that  all  mankind  will,  one 
time  or  other,  be  made  fully  sensible,  either  by  faith  in  it 
here,  as  revealed  in  the  word ;  or  by  feeling  its  effects,  to 
their  extreme  misery,  in  the  world  hereafter.  But  as 
the  human  mind  is  blind  to  divine  light,  and  as  both  our 
understandings  and  tongues  are  inadequate  to  conceive  of 
God  aright,  and  to  declare  him  (hence,  that  common  and 
just  observation,  that  it  is  an  arduous  thing  to  speak  of 
God  aright),  that  we  may  handle  so  important  a  subject  with 
that  reverence  and  perspicuity  wherewith  it  becomes  it  to  be 
treated,  we  must  chiefly  depend  on  his  aid,  'who  was  made 
the  "^righteousness  of  God  for  us,  God  himself  blessed  for 
ever.'  But  whatever  I  have  written,  and  whatever  I  have 
asserted,  on  this  subject,  whether  I  have  written  and  assert- 
ed it  with  modesty,  sobriety,  judgment,  and  humility,  must 
be  left  to  the  decision  of  such  as  are  competent  judges. 

•  This  word  commonly  means  a  previous  and  concise  view  of  a  subject,  or,  an  an- 
ticipation of  objections.  In  this  treatise  it  means,  a  natural  or  innate  conception  of 
divine  justice. 

b  The  word  in  the  original  means  either  to  claim  and  assert  a  right,  or  to  punish 
the  violation  of  it:  by  vindicatory  justice  then,  we  are  to  understand  that  perfection 
of  the  Deity,  which  disposes  him  to  vindicate  his  right  by  punishing  its  violators.  It 
ought  never  to  be  translated  vindictive,*  or  understood  as  meaning  revengeful. 

<=  Or  justice. 

*  But  Dr.  Owen  thus  designates  this  work  ;  '  My  book  of  the  Vindictive  Justice 
of  God  ;'  Works,  vol.  ix.  p.  188.  For  the  sense  in  which  he  uses  the  term  'vindic- 
tive,' see  vol.  vi.  pp.  392,  393.  vol.  ix.  46,  47.  vol.  x.  pp.  102,  103.     Editor. 


344        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICeT 

We  think  proper  to  divide  this  dissertation  into  two 
parts.  In  the  first  part,  which  contains  the  body  of  our 
opinion,  after  having  premised  some  general  descriptions  of 
divine  justice,  I  maintain  sin-punishing  justice  to  be  na- 
tural, and  in  its  exercise  necessary  to  God.  The  truth  of 
this  assertion  forms  a  very  distinguished  part  of  natural 
theology.  The  defence  of  it,  to  the  best  of  my  abilities, 
both  against  Socinians,  who  bitterly  oppose  it,  as  well  as 
against  certain  of  our  own  countrymen,  who,  in  defiance  of 
all  truth,  under  a  specious  pretext,  support  the  same  perni- 
cious scheme  with  them,  shall  be  the  subject  of  the  latter  part. 

In  almost  all  ages,  there  have  existed  some,  who  have 
denied  the  being  of  a  God,  although  but  very  few,  and  these 
the  most  abandoned.  And  as  mankind,  for  the  most  part, 
have  submitted  to  the  evidence  of  a  divine  existence ;  so 
there  never  has  existed  one,  who  has  ever  preferred  an  in- 
dictment of  injustice  against  God,  or  who  hath  not  de- 
clared him  to  be  infinitely  just.  The  despairing  complaints 
of  some  in  deep  calamities;  the  unhallowed  expostulations 
of  others  at  the  point  of  death,  do  not  bespeak  the  real  sen- 
timents of  the  man,  but  the  misery  of  his  situation.  As  for 
instance,  that  expostulation  of  Job  x.  3.  '  Is  it  good  unto 
thee  that  thou  shouldst  oppress?'  And  among  the  Gentiles, 
that  of  Brutus,  *  O  wretched  virtue!  how  mere  a  nothing  art 
thou,  but  a  name.'  And  that  furious  exclamation  of  Titus, 
when  dying,  related  by  Suetonius,  *  who,  pulling  aside  his 
curtains,  and  looking  up  to  the  heavens,  complained,  that 
his  life  was  taken  from  him,  undeservedly,  and  unjustly.'  Of 
the  same  kind  was  that  late  dreadful  epiphonema''  of  a  de- 
spairing Italian,  related  by  Mersennus,  who,  speaking  of 
God  and  the  devil,  in  dread  contempt  of  divine  justice,  ex- 
claimed, *  Let  the  strongest  take  me.' 

But  as  *  the  judgments  of  God  are  unsearchable,  and  his 
ways  past  finding  out,'  those  who  have  refused  to  submit  to 
his  absolute  dominion  and  supreme  jurisdiction  (some  mon- 
strous human  characters),  have  been  hardy  enough  to  assert 
that  there  is  no  God,  rather  than  venture  to  call  him  unjust. 
Hence  that  common  couplet. 

Marraoreo  tumulo  Licinus  jacet,  at  Cato  parvo, 
Porapeius  nullo,  credimus  esse  deos  ? 

''  A  sudden  uneonneeted  exclamation. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        345 

Licinus  lies  buried  in  a  marble  tomb  ;  Cato  in  a  mean  one; 
Pompey  has  none  :  can  we  believe  that  there  are  gods  ? 

And  hence  Ulysses  is  introduced  by  Euripides,  express- 
ing his  horror  of  the  gormandizing  of  the  man-devouring 
Cyclops,  in  these  verses  :^ 

O,  Jupiter,  behold  such  violations  of  hospitality,  for  if  thou  regardest  them  not. 
Thou  art  in  vain  accounted  Jupiter  :  for  thou  canst  be  no  god. 

Beyond  any  doubt,  the  audacity  of  these  abandoned 
triflers,  who  would  wish  to  seem  to  act  the  mad  part  with  a 
show  of  reason,  is  more  akin  to  the  madness  of  atheism, 
than  to  the  folly  of  ascribing  to  the  god  whom  they  worship 
and  acknowledge  such  attributes  as  would  not  only  be  un- 
worthy, but  disgraceful  to  him.  Protagoras,  therefore,  not 
comprehending  the  jv^tice  of  God,  in  respect  of  his  govern- 
ment, hath  written,  '  With  regard  to  the  gods,  I  do  not  know 
whether  they  exist,  or  do  not  exist.'  Yet,  even  among  the 
Gentiles  themselves,  and  those  who  were  destitute  of  the 
true  knowledge  of  the  true  God  (for  they,  in  some  sense, 
were  without  God  in  the  world),  writers  have  not  been  want- 
ing,^ who  have  endeavoured,  by  serious  and  forcible  argu- 
ments, to  unravel  the  difficulty  respecting  the  contrary  lots 
of  good  and  bad  men  in  this  life.  Our  first  idea,  therefore, 
of  the  Divine  Being,  and  the  natural  conceptions  of  all  men, 
demand  and  enforce  the  necessity  of  justice  being  ascribed 
to  God.  To  be  eloquent  then  in  so  easy  a  cause,  or  to 
triumph  with  arguments  on  a  matter  so  universally  acknow- 
ledged, we  have  neither  leisure  nor  inclination.  What,  and 
of  what  kind  the  peculiar  quality  and  nature  of  sin-punish- 
ing justice  is,  shall  now  be  briefly  explained.  And  that  we 
may  do  this  with  the  greater  perspicuity  and  force  of  evi- 
dence, a  few  observations  seem  necessary  to  be  premised 
concerning  justice  in  general,  and  its  more  commonly  re- 
ceived divisions. 

The  philosopher,  Aristotle,  long  ago,  as  is  well  known, 
hath  divided  justice  into  universal  and  particular.  Concern- 
ing the  former,  he  says,  that  he  might  compare  it  to  the  ce- 
lebrated saying,  '  Injustice  every  virtue  is  summarily  com- 
prehended.'    And  he  affirms,  that  it  in  nowise  differs  from 

*  Eurip.  in  Cyclop,  ver.  350. 
f  Tlie  most  distinguished  were  Seneca  and  Plutarch. 

VOL.    IX.  2    A 


346        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

virtue  in  general,  unless  in  respect  of  its  relation  to  another 
being. 

But,  he  says,  that  particular  justice  is  a  synonimous  part 
thereof,  which  he  again  distinguishes  into  distributive  and 
commutative.s  The  schoolmen  too  agreeing  with  him, 
which  is  rather  surprising,  divide  the  divine  justice  into  uni- 
versal and  particular.  For  that  excellence,  say  they,  is 
spoken  of  God  and  man  by  way  of  analogy  :^  nor  is  it  like 
that  bird  mentioned  by  Homer,  which  goes  by  a  double 
name ;  by  one  among  mortals,  by  another  among  the  im- 
mortals ; 

The  gods  call  it  Chalcis,  but  men,  Cuniindis. — Hom. 

But  is  understood  as  existing  in  God  principally,  as  in 
the  first  analogized'  being.  Nor  do  later  divines  dissent 
from  them :  nay,  all  of  them,  who  have  made  the  divine 
attributes  the  subject  of  their  contemplations,  have,  by  their 
unanimous'  voice,  approved  of  this  distinction,  and  given 
their  suffrages  in  its  favour. 

But  farther  they  assert,  that  particular  justice,  in  respect 
of  its  exercise,  consists  either  in  what  is  said,  or  in  what  is 
done.  That  which  is  displayed  in  things  said,  in  commands, 
is  equity ;  in  declarations,  truth ;  both  which  the  Holy 
Scriptures'"  do  sometimes  point  out  under  the  title  of  Divine 
Justice.  But  the  justice  which  respects  things  done,  is 
either  that  of  government,  or  jurisdiction,  or  judgment:  and 
this  again  they  affirm  to  be  either  remunerative,  or  corrective; 
but  that  corrective  is  either  castigatory,  or  vindicatory. 
With  the  last  member  of  this  last  distinction,  I  begin  this 
work:  and  yet,  indeed,  although  the  most  learned  of  our 
divines,  in  later  ages,  have  assented  to  this  distribution  of 
divine  justice  into  these  various  significations,  it  seems  pro- 
per to  me  to  proceed  in  a  manner  somewhat  different,  and 
more  suited  to  our  purpose. 

I  say  then,  that  the  justice  of  God  may  be  considered  in 
a  twofold  manner. 

s  That  which  relates  to  fair  exchange. 

*•  Analogy  means  a  resemblance  between  things  with  regard  to  some  qualities  or 
circumstances,  properties  or  effects,  though  not  in  all. 

'  That  is,  the  first  being  whose  perfections  have  been  explained  by  analogy  :  or, 
by  tracing  a  resemblance  between  these  perfections  and  something  like  them  in  our- 
selves, in  kind  or  sort,  tliough  differing  infinitely  with  respect  to  manner  and  degree. 

^  Rom.  i.  14.  iii.  21.  Ezra  ix.  15.  Neh.  ix.  8,  &c.  &c. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       347 

First,  Absolutely,  and  in  itself. 

Secondly,  In  respect  of  its  egress  and  exercise. 

First.  The  justice  of  God,  absolutely  considered,  is  the 
universal  rectitude  and  perfection  of  the  divine  nature :  for 
such  is  the  divine  nature  antecedent  to  all  acts  of  his  will, 
and  suppositions  of  objects  tow^ards  which  it  might  operate. 
This  excellence  is  most  universal :  nor  from  its  own  nature, 
as  an  excellence,  can  it  belong'  to  any  other  being. 

Secondly.  It  is  to  be  viewed  with  respect  to  its  egress 
and  exercise.  And  thus,  in  the  order  of  nature,  it  is  consi- 
dered as  consequent,  or  at  least  as  concomitant  to  some 
acts  of  the  divine  will,  assigning  or  appointing  to  it  a  proper 
object.  Hence  that  rectitude,  which  in  itself  is  an  absolute 
property  of  the  divine  nature,  is  considered  as  a  relative  and 
hypothetical'"  attribute,  and  has  a  certain  habitude  to  its 
proper  objects. 

That  is  to  say,  this  rectitude,  or  universal  justice,  has 
certain  egresses  towards  objects  out  of  itself,  in  consequence 
of  the  divine  will,  and  in  a  manner  agreeable  to  the  rule  of 
his  supreme  right  and  wisdom,  namely,  when  some  object  of 
justice  is  supposed  and  appointed  (which  object  must  ne- 
cessarily depend  on  the  mere  good  pleasure  of  God,  because 
it  was  possible  it  might  never  have  existed  at  all;  God  not- 
withstanding continuing  just  and  righteous  to  all  eternity); 
and  these  egresses  are  twofold. 

1.  They  are  absolute  and  perfectly  free,  viz.  in  words. 

2.  They  are  necessary,  viz.  in  actions. 

For  the  justice  of  God  is  neither  altogether  one  of  that 
kind  of  perfections,  which  create  and  constitute  an  object 
to  themselves,  as  power  and  wisdom  do :  nor  of  that  kind 
which  not  only  require  an  object  for  their  exercise,  but  one 
peculiarly  affected  and  circumstanced,  as  mercy,  patience 
and  forbearance  do ;  but  may  be  considered  in  both  points 
of  view,  as  shall  be  more  fully  demonstrated  hereafter. 

1.  For,  first,  it  has  absolute  egresses  in  words  (consti- 
tuting, and  as  it  were  creating  an  object  to  itself);  as  for 
instance,  in  words  of  legislation,  and  is  then  called  equity ; 
or  in  words  of  declaration  and  narration,  and  is  then  called 
truth.     Both  these,"  I  suppose  for  the  present,  to  take  place 

■■  Or,  have  a  respect  to  any  other  being.  ™  Conditional. 

"  Viz.  The  egresses  in  worcis  of  legislation  ;  and  in  words  of  declaration  and  nar- 
ir.atioji. 

2  A  2 


348        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

absolutely  and  freely.  Whether  God  hath  necessarily  pre- 
scribed a  law  to  his  rational  creatures,  at  least  one  accom- 
panied with  threats  and  promises,  is  another  consideration. 

2.  There  are  respective  egresses  of  this  justice  in  deeds, 
and  according  to  the  distinctions  above-mentioned  ;  that  is 
to  say,  it  is  exercised  either  in  the  government  of  all 
things,  according  to  what  is  due  to  them  by  the  counsel  and 
will  of  God  ;  or,  in  judgments  rewarding,  or  punishing, 
according  to  the  rule  of  his  right  and  wisdom,  which  also 
is  the  rule  of  equity  in  legislation,  and  of  truth  in  the  de- 
clarations annexed.  In  respect  of  these,  °  I  call  the  egresses 
of  the  divine  justice  necessary,  and  such  that  they  could  not 
possibly  be  otherwise,  which,  by  divine  help,  I  shall  prove 
hereafter.  And  this  is  the  same  as  saying,  that  vindicatory 
justice  is  so  natural  to  God,  that  sin  being  supposed,  he 
cannot,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  right,  wisdom,  and  truth, 
but  punish  it.  But  antecedent  to  this  whole  exercise  of  the 
divine  justice,  I  suppose  a  natural  right,  which  indispensably 
requires  the  dependance  and  moral  subjection  of  the  rational 
creature,  in  God,  all  the  egresses  of  whose  justice,  in  words, 
contain  an  arrest  of  judgment  till  farther  trial,  in  respect  of 
the  object.. 

It  now  then  appears,  that  all  these  distinctions  of  divine 
justice,  respect  it  not  as  considered  in  itself,  but  its  egresses 
and  exercise  only  ;  to  make  which  cleai',  was  the  reason  that 
I  departed  from  the  beaten  track.  Nay,  perhaps,  it  would 
be  a  difficult  matter  to  assign  any  virtue  to  God,  but  in  the 
general,  and  not  as  haying  any  specific  ratio  p  of  any  virtue; 
but  that  which  answers  to  the  ratio  of  any  particular  virtue 
in  God,  consists  in  the  exercise  of  the  same.  For  instance, 
mercy  is  properly  attributed  to  God,  so  far  as  it  denotes  the 
highest  perfection  in  the  will  of  God  ;  the  particular  ratio 
or  quality  of  which,  viz.  a  disposition  of  assisting  the  mi- 
serable, with  a  compassion  of  their  misery,  is  found  not 
altogether  as  to  some,  as  to  others,  altogether  and  only  in 
the  exercise  of  the  above-mentioned  perfection ;''  but  it  is 

"  Viz.  the  egresses  in  the  government  of  things  according  to  wliat  is  due  to 
Iheni,  by  the  connsul  of  his  will  ;  or,  in  jiulgiuents  rewarding  or  punishing,  accord- 
ing to  the  rule  of  his  right  and  wisdom. 

P  That  is,  any  distinguishing  sort  or  quality. 

1  In  the  general  sparing  mercy  of  God,  the  particular  quality  of  mercy,  viz. 
a  disposition  of  assi^iting  the  miserable  with  a  compassion  of  their  misery,  is  not 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        349 

called  a  proper  attribute  of  God,  because,  by  means  of  it, 
some  operation  is  performed  agreeable  to  the  nature  of  God, 
which,  in  respect  of  his  other  attributes,  his  will  would  not 
produce.  This  kind,  therefore,  of  the  divine  attributes, 
because  they  have  proper  and  formal  objects,  thence  only 
derive  their  formal  and  specific  ratios.  But  all  these  ob- 
servations upon  justice  must  be  briefly  examined  and  ex- 
plained, that  we  may  arrive  at  the  point  intended. 


CHAP.  II. 

The  universal  justice  of  God.  The  idle  fancies  of  the  schoolmen.  The  ar- 
guments of  Durandus  against  commutative  justice.  Suarez's  censure  of 
the  scholastic  reasonings.  His  opinion  of  divine  justice.  The  examina- 
tion of  it.  A  description  of  uiiiversal  justice  from  the  sacred  writings. 
A  division  of  it  in  respect  of  its  egress.  Rectitude  of  government  in  God. 
What,  and  of  what  hind.  Definitions  of  the  philosophers  and  lawyers. 
Divisions  of  the  justice  of  government.  A  caution  respecting  these- 
Vindicatory  justice.  The  opiiiions  of  the  partisans.  An  explication  of 
the  true  opinion.  Who  the  adversaries  are.  The  state  of  the  controversy 
farther  considered. 

We  are  first  then  briefly  to  treat  of  the  universal  justice  of 
God;  or  of  his  justice  considered  in  itself,  and  absolutely, 
which  contains  in  it  all  the  divine  excellencies.  The 
schoolmen,  treading  in  the  steps  of  the  philosophers,  who 
have  acknowledged  no  kind  of  justice  which  has  not  natu- 
rally some  respect  to  another  object,  are  for  the  most  part 
silent  concerning  this  justice.  And  once,  by  the  way  to 
take  notice  of  these,  on  this  as  almost  on  every  other  sub- 
ject, they  are  strangely  divided.  Duns  Scotus,  Durandus, 
and  Poludamus,  deny  that  there  is  commutative  justice  in 
God.» 

For  the  master  of  the  sentences  himself  calls  God  an  im- 
partial and  just  distributor,  but  says  not  a  word  of  commu- 
tation. Thomas  Aquinas,**  and  Cajetan,  do  the  same  ;  though 
the  latter  says,  'that  some  degree  of  commutative  justice  is 

wholly  found,  because  there  are  many  of  mankind  towards  whom  this  disposition 
of  assisting  is  never  effectually  exerted  ;  but  in  the  pardoning  mercy  of  God  to  his 
people,  it  is  fully  and  gloriously  displayed. 

a  Palud.  on  the  Sent,  book  4.  distinct.  46. 

*>  Thomas,  first  page  of  quest.  21.  and  Cajetan,  2.  2.  qu.  61.  A.  4. 


350  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

discernible.'  So  also  Ferorariensis,  on  the  same  place :  and 
Scotus,  in  the  third  book  of  his  treatise,  '  of  Nature  and 
Grace/  chap.  vii.  Durandus,  in  particular,  contends,  with 
many  arguments,  that  this  kind  of  justice  ought  not  to  be 
assigned  to  God.  First,  because  that  this  justice  observes 
an  equality  between  the  thing  given  and  received,  which 
cannot  be  the  case  between  us  and  God.  And,  secondly, 
because  that  we  cannot  be  of  any  service  to  him  (which  he 
proves  from  Rom.  xi.  35,  Job  xxii.  3.  and  xxxv.  7.  Luke  xvii. 
10.),  whereby  he  can  be  bound  to  make  an  equahty  with  us 
by  virtue  of  commutation.  And,  thirdly,  because  that  we 
cannot  make  an  equal  return  to  God  for  benefits  received. 
And,  finally,  that  as  there  is  no  proper  commutative  justice 
between  a  father  and  his  children,  according  to  Aristotle's'^ 
opinion,  much  less  can  it  subsist  between  God  and  us. 

But  the  same  Durandus  likewise  denies  to  God  distribu- 
tive justice,*^  because  he  is  not  indebted  to  any  one  :  he,  how- 
ever, acknowledges  some  mode  of  distributive  justice  ;  and 
Pesantius*  follows  his  opinion. 

But  Gabriel,  on  the  same'  distinction,  asserts,  commuta- 
tive justice  to  be  inherent  in  God ;  for  there  is  a  certain 
equality,  as  he  says,  between  God  and  man,  from  the  ac- 
ceptation of  God  the  receiver.  Proudly  enough  said  indeed  ! 
But  what  shall  we  say  of  these  triflers  ?  They  resemble  those 
advocates  in  Terence,  whose  opinion,  after  Demipho,  era- 
barassed  by  the  cheats  of  Phormio  the  sycophant,  had  asked, 
he  exclaims,  *  Well  done,  gentlemen,  I  am  now  in  a  greater 
uncertainty  than  before.'  So  intricate  were  their  answers, 
and  resembling  the  practices  of  the  Andabatse.^ 

Hence  Suarez  himself,  after  he  had  reviewed  the  opinions 
of  the  schoolmen  concerning  the  justice  of  God,  bids  adieu 
to  them  all,  declaring,  'That  the  expressions  of  Scripture  had 
greater  weight  with  him  than  their  philosophic  human  ar- 
guments.' But  with  much  labour  and  prolixity,  he  insists 
that  both  distributive  and  commutative  justice  are  to  be  as- 
cribed to  God,  that  so  he  might  pave  the  way  for  that  rotten 
fiction  concerning  the  merits  of  Roman  Catholics  with  God  j 
a  doctrine  which,  were  even  all  his  suppositions  granted, 

c  Eth.  b.  8.  c.  8.  <^  On  dist.  46. 

*  In.  2.  2.  Thomas.  '  A  work  to  which  he  alludes. 

s  A  kind  of  fencers  who  fought  on  horseback  hood- winked. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       351 

appears  not  to  follow,  much  less  to  be  confirmed.''  This 
opinion  of  Suarez,  concerning  vindicatory  justice,  as  it  is 
deservedly  famous  in  scholastic  theology,  we  think  proper 
to  lay  before  you  in  few  words. 

In  his  discourses  concerning  the  justice  of  God,'  he  con- 
tends that  the  afFection*"  of  punishing,  which  he  calls  *  a  per- 
fection elicitive'  of  the  act  of  punishing,'  is  properly  and 
formally  inherent  in  God  ;  and  it  is  so,  because  it  hath  a 
proper  object,  viz.  to  punish  the  guilt  of  sin  which  is  ho- 
nourable ;  nor  does  it  include  any  imperfection,  and  there- 
fore that  some  formal  and  proper  divine  attribute  ought  to 
correspond  to  that  effect. 

He  farther  maintains,  that  this  affection  of  punishing  is 
neither  commutative  nor  distributive  justice.  His  conclu- 
sions here  I  do  not  oppose,  though  I  cannot  approve  of 
many  of  his  reasonings  and  arguments.  In  fine,  he  contends, 
that  vindicatory  justice  in  '  God'  is  the  same  with  universal, 
or  legal,  or  providential  justice,  which  we  call  the  justice  of 
government.  But  he  makes  a  dishonourable  and  base  con- 
clusion, from  a  distinction  about  the  persons  punished,  viz. 
into  such  as  are  merely  passive  sufferers,  and  such  as  spon- 
taneously submit  themselves  to  punishment,  that  they  may 
satisfy  the  punitory  justice  of  God  :  reasoning  in  such  a 
manner,  that  after  he  has  forced  the  whole  doctrine  con- 
cerning the  commutative  and  distributive  justice  of  God,  to 
become  subservient  to  that  sacrilegious  and  proud  error, 
concerning  the  merits  of  man  with  God,  and  even  of  one 
from  the  supererogation  of  another ;  he  strenuously  endea- 
vours to  establish  a  consistency  between  this  doctrine  of 
vindicatory  jvistice,  and  a  fiction,  not  less  impious  and  dis- 
graceful to  the  blood  of  Christ,  'which  cleanseth  us  from  all 
sin,'  about  penal  satisfactions  to  be  performed  by  such  ways 
and  means  as  God  hath  never  prescribed,  or  even  thought 
of. 

Desinat  in  piscera  tnulier  formosa  superne. — Hon. 

Dismissing  these  bunglers  (who  know  not  the  righteous- 
ness of  God),  then,  from  our  dissertation,  let  us  attend  to 
the  more  sure  word  of  prophecy.     That  word  every  where 

h  Suarez's  Lectures  of  the  Justice  of  God.  'Sect.  .5.  "^  Or  quality. 

'  That  is,  inducing  to,  or  drawing  forth  the  act  of  punishing. 


352       A    DISSERTATION  ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

asserts  God  to  be  just,  and  possessed  of  such  justice  as  de- 
notes the  universal  rectitude,  and  perfection  of  his  divine 
nature.  His  essence  is  most  wise,  "most  perfect,  most  ex- 
cellent, most  merciful,  most  blessed :  that,  in  fine,  is  the 
justice  of  God,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  viz.  considei'ed 
absolutely,  and  in  itself:  nor  would  the  Holy  Scriptures 
have  us  to  understand  any  thing  else  by  divine  justice,  than 
the  power  and  readiness  of  God  to  do  all  things  rightly  and 
becomingly,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  wisdom,  goodness, 
truth,  mercy,  and  clemency.  Hence  the  above-mentioned 
sophists  agree,  that  justice,  taken  precisely,  and  in  itself, 
and  abstracting  it  from  all  human  imperfections,  simply 
means  perfection  without  intrinsic  imperfection  :  for  it  is 
not  a  virtue  that  rules  the  passions,  but  directs  their  opera- 
tions. 

Hence  it  presides,  as  it  were,  in  all  the  divine  decrees, 
actions,  works  and  words,  of  whatsoever  kind  they  be :  there 
is  no  egress  of  the  divine  will;  no  work  or  exercise  of  pro- 
vidence, though  immediately  and  distinctly  breathing  cle- 
mency, mercy,  anger,  truth,  or  wisdom,  but  in  respect 
thereof,  God  is  eminently  said  to  be  just,  and  to  execute 
justice.  Hence,  Isa.  li.  6.  He  is  said  to  be  'just,  and 
bringing  salvation;'  Rom.  iii.  25,  26.  Just  in  pardoning 
sin;  Psal.  cxliii.  11.  Justin  avenging  and  punishing  sin; 
Rom.  iii.  5,  6.  Just  in  all  the  exercises  of  his  supreme  right 
and  dominion  ;  Job  xxxiv.  12 — 14.  Rom.  ix.  8.  14,  15.  He 
is  just,  in  sparing  according  to  his  mercy.  Just  in  pu- 
nishing according  to  his  anger  and  wrath.  In  a  word,  what- 
soever by  reason  of  his  right,  he  doeth  orworketh  according 
*  to  the  counsel  of  his  will,'  whatever  proceeds  from  his 
faithfulness,  mercy,  grace,  love,  clemency,  anger,  and  even 
from  his  fury,  is  said  to  be  done  by,  through,  and  because  of 
his  justice,  as  the  perfection  inducing  to,  or,  the  cause  ef- 
fecting and  procuring  such  operations.  It  is  evident  then, 
that  justice,  universally  taken,  denotes  the  highest  rectitude 
of  the  divine  nature,  and  a  power  and  promptitude  of  doing 
all  things,  in  a  manner  becoming  and  agreeable  to  his  wis- 
dom, goodness,  and  right. 

The  more  solemn  egresses  of  this  justice,  to  which  all  par- 
ticular acts  may  be  easily  reduced,  have  been  already 
pointed  out :  but  equity  in  legislation,  fidelity  and  truth  in 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  353 

declarations,  and  the  promises  annexed  to  them,  in  which 
God  is  often  said  to  be  just,  and  to  execute  justice,  I  think 
may  be  passed  over,  as  being  too  remote  from  our  purpose. 
But  as  it  appears  that  some  light  may  be  thrown  on  this 
subject,  which  we  are  now  treating  of,  from  the  consideration 
of  the  relation  of  rectitude  and  divine  wisdom,  that  is,  of 
universal  justice  to  government  and  judgment,  we  must  say 
a  few  words  on  that  head. 

But  rectitude  of  government,  to  which  that  justice  ana- 
logically corresponds,  is  that  which  philosophers  and  civili- 
ans unanimously  agree  to  be  the  highest  excellence,  though 
they  have  variously  described  it,  Aristotle  calls  it '  a  habit 
by  which  men  are  capable  of  doing  just  things,  and  by  which 
they  both  will  and  do  just  things  ;'""  attributing  to  it  apti- 
tude, will,  and  action.  Cicero"  calls  it  *  an  affection  of  the 
mind,  giving  to  every  one  his  due;'  understanding  by  affec- 
tion not  any  passion  of  the  mind,  but  a  habit.  The  civilians 
understand  by  it,  *  a  constant  and  perpetual  will,  assigning 
to  every  one  his  due.'  The  propriety  of  their  definition, 
we  leave  to  themselves.  That  constant  and  perpetual  will 
of  theirs,  is  the  same  as  the  habit  of  the  philosophers,  which, 
whether  it  be  the  proper  genus"  of  this  virtue,  let  logicians 
determine.  Again,  as  they  constantly  attribute  three  acts 
to  right,  which  is  the  object  of  justice,  viz.  *  to  live  honestly, 
to  hurt  nobody,  and  to  give  every  one  his  due  ;'  how  comes 
it  to  pass  that  they  define  justice  by  one  act,  when  doubtless 
it  respects  all  right :  therefore  it  is,  they  say,  that  to  give 
every  one  his  due,  is  not  of  the  same  extent  in  the  definition 
of  justice,  and  in  the  description  of  the  acts  of  right. 

But  let  them  both  unite  in  their  sentiments  as  they  please, 
neither  the  habit  or  affection  of  the  philosophers,  nor  the 
living  honestly,  and  hurting  nobody,  of  the  civilians,  can 
be  assigned  to  God.  For  in  ascribing  the  perfection  of 
excellencies  to  him,  we  exclude  the  ratio  of  habit  or  qua- 
lity, properly  so  called,  and  every  material  and  imperfect 
mode  of  operation.  He  must  be  a  mortal  man,  and  subject 
to  a  law  to  whom  these  things  apply. 

Moreover  those  (I  speak  of  our  own  countrymen),  who 
divide  this  justice  of  government  into  commutative  and  dis- 
tributive, rob  God  entirely  of  the  commutative,  which  con- 

•"  Ethics,  book  b.  chap.  1.  "  De  Finibus.  <>  Or  class. 


354  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

sists  in  a  mutual  giving  and  receiving.  '  For  v^rho  first  hath 
given  any  thing  to  him?'  Who  made  'thee  to  differ  from 
another?  He  giveth  no  account  of  his  matters.'  But  dis- 
tributive, which  belongs  to  him  as  the  supreme  governor  of 
all  things,  who  renders  to  every  one  his  due,  is  proper  to 
himself  alone.  This  we  have  above  asserted  to  be  the 
justice  of  government,  or  judgment.  Of  this  justice  of 
government,  frequent  mention  is  made  in  the  sacred  writ- 
ings. It  is  that  perfection  of  the  Divine  Being,  whereby 
he  directs  all  his  actions  in  governing  and  administering 
created  things,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  rectitude  and 
wisdom.  But  this  excellence,  or  habitude  for  action,  in  no 
wise  differs  from  universal  justice,  unless  -in  respect  of  its 
relation  to  another  being.  But  what  is  a  law  to  us  in  the 
administration  of  things,  in  God  is  his  right,  in  conjunction 
with  his  most  wise  and  just  will.  For  God,  as  it  is  said,  is 
a  law  unto  himself.  To  this  justice,  are  these  passages  to 
be  referred,  Zeph.  iii.  5.  2  Chron.  xii.  6.  Psal,  vii.  9.  Jer. 
xii.  1,  2.  Tim.  iv.  8.  with  almost  innumerable  others.  But 
in  all  the  effects  and  egresses  of  this  justice,  God  is  justified, 
not  from  the  reason  of  things,  but  from  his  dominion  and 
supreme  right.  Thus,  Job  xiv.  14.  xxxiii.  12,  13.  xxxiv. 
12 — 14.  And  this  is  the  first  egress  of  the  divine  rectitude 
in  works. 

The  other  egress  of  this  justice  is  in  judgment,  the  last 
member  of  the  divisions  of  which  above-mentioned,  viz.  that 
by  which  God  punishes  the  crimes  of  rational  beings,  to 
whom  a  law  hath  been  given,  according  to  the  rule  of  his 
right,  is  the  vindicatory  justice  of  which  we  are  treating. 

Here  again,  reader,  I  would  wish  to  put  you  in  mind, 
that  I  by  no  means  assert  many  species  ot  universal  justice, 
or  so  to  speak,  particular  or  special  justices,  as  distinct  per- 
fections in  God,  which  others  seem  to  do  ;  but  one  only,  viz. 
the  universal  and  essential  rectitude  of  the  divine  nature, 
and  therefore  I  maintain,  that  this  very  vindicatory  justice 
itself  is  the  rectitude  and  perfection  of  the  Deity  variously 
exercised. 

Some  of  the  schoolmen,  however,  agree  with  me  in  opi- 
nion ;  for  Cajetan''  upon  Thomas  grants,  that  vindicatory  jus- 

P  Quest,  ii.  2. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         355 

tice,  in  a  public  person,  differs  nothing  from  legal  and  univer- 
sal justice.  Although  he  maintains  that  there  is  a  peculiar 
species  of  justice  in  a  private  person;  a  position  which,  I 
confess,  I  do  not  understand,  since  punishment,  considered 
as  punishment,  is  not  the  right  of  a  private  person.  God 
certainly  does  not  punish  us,  as  being  injured,  but  as  a  ruler 
and  judge.  But  again,  concerning  this  justice,  another 
question  arises,  whether  it  be  natural  to  God,  or,  an  essen- 
tial attribute  of  the  divine  nature  ;  that  is  to  say,  such  that 
the  existence  of  sin  being  admitted,  God  must  necessarily 
exercise  it,  because  it  supposes  in  him  a  constant  and  im- 
mutable will  to  punish  sin  :  so  that  while  he  acts  consistent 
with  his  nature,  he  cannot  do  otherwise  than  punish  and 
avenge  it?  Or,  whether  it  be  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will, 
which  he  may  exercise  at  pleasure  ?  On  this  point  theolo- 
gians are  divided.  We  shall  consider  what  has  been  deter- 
mined on  the  matter,  by  the  most  notorious  enemies  of  di- 
vine truth,  and  especially  by  those  of  our  own  times. 

1.  Then,  they  own,  'That  such  a  kind  of  justice  is  appli- 
cable to  God,  which,  were  he  always  inclined  to  exercise, 
he  might,  consistent  with  right,  destroy  all  sinners,  without 
waiting  for  their  repentance,  and  so  let  no  sin  pass  unpu- 
nished.' 

2.  'That  he  will  not  pardon  any  sins,  but  those  of  the 
penitent.' 

Nor  do  they  deny,  so  far  as  I  know, 

3.  '  That  God  hath  determined  the  punishment  of  sin, 
by  the  rule  of  his  right  and  wisdom.' 

But  they  deny, 

1.  That  perfection  by  which  God  punishes  sins,  either 
to  be  his  justice,  or  to  be  so  called  in  Scripture  ;  but,  only 
anger,  fury,  or  fierce  indignation,  expressions,  denoting  in 
the  clearest  manner,  the  freedom  of  the  divine  will  in  the  act 
of  punishing.  Although  some  of  Socinus's  followers,  among 
whom  is  Crellius,  have  declared  openly  against  him  on  this 
point. 

Again,  they  deny. 

2.  That  there  is  any  such  attribute  in  God  as  requires 
a  satisfaction  for  sins,  which  he  is  willing  to  forgive ;  but 
maintain,  that  he  is  entirely  free  '  to  yield  up  his  claim  of 
right,'  as  they  phrase  it,  at  pleasure  ;  that  therefore  divine 


356        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

justice  ought,  by  no  means,  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
causes  of  Christ's  death  ;  nay  more,  say  they,  such  a  kind 
of  justice  may  be  found  in  the  epistles  of  Iscariot  to  the 
Pharisees  (they  are  the  words  of  Gitichius),  but  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Such  are  the  opinions  of  those  concerning  whom  we  are 
disputing  at  this  present  day,  whether  they  be  heretics ; 
certainly  they  are  not  Christians.  Between  their  sentiments 
and  ours  on  this  point,  there  is  the  widest  difference  :  for 
we  affirm,  the  justice  by  which  God  punishes  sin,  to  be  the 
very  essential  rectitude  of  Deity  itself,  exercised  in  the  pu- 
nishment of  sins,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  wisdom,  and 
which  is  in  itself  no  more  free,  than  the  divine  essence. 

This  kind  of  justice  Socinus  opposes  with  all  his  might, 
in  almost  all  his  writings,  but  especially  in  his  Theological 
Lectures  of  the  Saviour,  book  i.  chap.  i.  &.c.  Moscorovius 
also  on  the  Racovian  catechism,  chap.  viii.  quest.  19.  Os- 
torodius,  a  most  absurd  heretic,  in  his  Institutions,  chap. 
xxxi.  and  in  his  Disputations  to  Tradelius  Volkelius,  of  the 
true  Religion,  book  v.  chap.  xxi.  Also  Crellius,  the  most 
acute  and  learned  of  all  the  adversaries,  in  that  book  which 
he  wished  to  have  prefixed  to  the  Dissertations  of  Volkelius, 
chap,  xxviii.  and  in  his  Vindications  against  Grotius,  chap,  i. 
In  a  little  work  also,  entitled,  *  Of  the  Causes  of  the  Death 
of  Christ,'  chap.  xvi.  He  pursued  the  same  object  in  almost 
all  his  other  writings,  both  polemical  and  dogmatical,  and 
likewise  in  his  commentaries ;  a  very  artful  man,  and  one 
that  employed  very  great  diligence  and  learning  in  the  worst 
of  causes.  Michael  Gitichius  has  the  same  thing  in  view,  in 
his  writings  against  Parseus,  and  in  his  dispute  with  Ludo- 
vicus  Lucius,  in  defence  of  his  first  argument,  a  most  trifling 
sophist,  a  mere  copyist  of  Socinus,  and  a  servile  follower  of 
his  master.  Of  mightier  powers  too  rise  up  against  us,  Va- 
lentinus  Smalcius  against  Franzius ;  and,  who  is  said  to  be 
still  alive,  the  learned  Jonas  Schlichtingius.  All  these,  with 
the  rest  of  that  herd,  place  all  their  hopes  of  overturning  the 
doctrine  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  in  opposing  this  jus- 
tice. 

But  these  are  not  the  only  adversaries  we  have  to  do 
with  :  there  are  others,  pious,  worthy,  and  very  learned  di- 
vines, who,  respecting  the  point  of  Christ's  satisfaction,  are 


A     DI8SERTAT101V    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        357 

most  strictly  orthodox  ;  and  who,  though  they  cannot  find  in 
their  hearts  directly  to  deny  that  such  an  attribute  or  power 
is  essential  to  God  :  yet  maintain  all  its  egresses,  and  its 
whole  exercise,  respecting  sin,  to  be  so  free  and  dependant 
on  the  mere  free  motion  and  good  pleasure  of  the  divine  will, 
that  should  not  that  oppose,  God  might  by  his  nod,  by  his 
word,  without  any  trouble,  by  other  modes  and  ways,  be- 
sides the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  if  it  only  seemed  proper  to 
his  wisdom,  take  away,  pardon,  and  make  an  end  of  sin, 
without  inflicting  any  penalty  for  the  transgression  of  his 
law.  And  this,  it  is  said,  was  the  opinion  of  Augustine. 
By  which,  I  will  say,  rash  and  daring  assertion,  be  it  spoken 
without  offence,  for  they  are  truly  great  men,  by  their  nod 
and  breath  they  suspend  and- disperse  the  very  strongest  ar- 
guments, by  which  the  adversaries  feel  themselves  most 
hardly  pushed,  and  by  which  the  belief  of  Christ's  satisfac- 
tion is  strongly  supported  ;  and  deliver  up  our  most  holy 
cause,  I  had  almost  said,  defenceless,  to  be  the  sport  of  the 
Philistines.  Nay,  not  very  long  ago,  it  has  been  discovered 
and  lamented  by  the  orthodox,  that  very  considerable  as- 
sistance has  been  imprudently  given  by  a  learned-country- 
man of  our  own,  to  these  aliens,  who  defy  the  armies  of  the 
living  God.  '  For,  if  we  could  but  get  rid  of  this  justice, 
even  if  we  had  no  other  proof,'  says  Socinus,  *  that  human 
fiction  of  Christ's  satisfaction  would  be  thoroughly  exposed, 
and  would  vanish.'  Soc.  of  the  Saviour,  book  iii.  chap.  1,  &,c. 
Of  our  own  countrymen,  the  only  one  I  know  is  Ru- 
therford, a  Scotch  divine,  who  roundly  and  boldly  asserts, 
*  Punitive  justice  to  be  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will  :'  nor  is 
he  content  with  the  bare  assertion,  but  supported  chiefly  by 
his  arguments,  to  whom  the  schoolmen  are  so  much  in- 
debted, he  defends  the  fallacy,  against  both  Cameron  and 
Voetius,  those  two  thunderbolts  of  theological  war;  though, 
in  my  opinion,  neither  with  a  force  of  argument  nor  felicity 
of  issue  equal  to  his  opponents.  But  both  the  one  and  the 
others  grant,  that  God  hath  decreed  to  let  no  sin  pass  un- 
punished without  a  satisfaction  :  but  that  decree  being  sup- 
posed, with  a  law  given,  and  a  sanction  of  the  same  by  threat- 
enings,  that  a  satisfaction  was  necessary:  but,  that  punitive 
justice  necessarily  requires  the  punishment  of  all  sins,  ac- 


358        A     DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

cording  to  the  rule  of  God's  right  and  wisdom,  this  is  what 
they  deny,  and  endeavour  to  overturn. 

But  to  me,  these  arguments  are  altogether  astonishing ; 
viz.  'that  sin-punishing  justice  should  be  natural  to  God,  and 
yet  that  God,  sin  being  supposed  to  exist,  mai/  either  exer- 
cise it,  or  not  exercise  it'  They  may  also  say,  and  with  as 
much  propriety,  that  truth  is  natural  to  God  ;  but  upon  a 
supposition  that  he  were  to  converse  with  man,  he  might 
either  use  it,  or  not :  or,  that  omnipotence  is  natural  to  God ; 
but  upon  a  supposition  that  he  were  inclined  to  do  any  work 
without  himself,  that  it  were  free  to  him  to  act  omnipotently, 
or  not:  or,  finally,  that  sin-punishing  justice  is  among  the 
primary  causes  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  that  Christ  was 
set  forth  as  a  propitiation,  to  declare  his  righteousness,  and 
yet  that,  that  justice  required  not  the  punishment  of  sin. 
For  if  it  should  require  it,  how  is  it  possible  that  it  should 
not  necessarily  require  it,  since  God  would  be  unjust,  if  he 
should  not  inflict  punishment?  Or  farther,  they  might  as 
well  assert,  that  God  willed  that  justice  should  be  satisfied 
by  so  many  and  such  great  sufferings  of  his  Son  Christ,  when 
that  justice  required  no  such  thing  ;  nay  more,  that  setting 
aside  the  free  act  of  the  divine  will,  sin  mid  no  sin  are  the 
same  with  God,  and  that  man's  mortality  hath  not  followed, 
chiefly  as  the  consequence  of  sin,  but  of  the  will  of  God. 
These  and  such  like  difficulties.  Heave  to  the  authors  of  this 
opinion  (for  they  are  very  learned  men)  to  unravel.  As  to 
myself,  they  fill  me  with  confusion  and  astonishment. 

But  this  I  cannot  forbear  to  mention,  that  these  very  di- 
vines, who  oppose  our  opinion,  when  hard  pushed  by  their 
adversaries,  perpetually  have  recourse  in  their  disputations 
to  this  justice,  as  to  their  sacred  anchor  ;  and  assert,  that 
without  a  satisfaction,  God  could  not  pardon  sin,  consistent 
with  his  nature,  justice,  and  truth.  But  as  these  are  very 
great  absurdities,  it  would  have  seemed  strange  to  me,  that 
any  men  of  judgment  and  orthodoxy  should  have  been  so 
entangled  in  some  of  these  sophisms,  as  to  renounce  the 
truth  on  their  account,  unless  I  had  happened  at  one  time 
myself  to  fall  into  the  same  snare ;  which,  to  the  praise  and 
glory  of  that  truth,  of  which  I  am  now  a  servant,  I  freely 
confess  to  have  been  my  case. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  359 

But  to  avoid  mistakes,  as  much  as  possible,  in  discussing 
the  nature  of  this  justice,  we  will  make  the  following  obser- 
vations. 

1.  There  are  some  attributes  of  Deity  which,  in  order 
to  their  exercise,  require  no  determined  object  antecedent  to 
their  egress  :  of  this  kind  are  wisdom  and  power.  These  at- 
tributes, at  least,  as  to  their  first  exercise,  must  be  entirely 
free,  and  dependant  on  the  mere  good  pleasure  of  God  only; 
so  that  antecedent  to  their  acting,  the  divine  will  is  so  in- 
different as  to  every  exercise  of  them,  on  objects  without 
himself,  that  he  might  even  will  the  opposite.  But  if  we 
suppose  that  God  wills  to  do  any  work  without  himself,  he 
must  act  omnipotently  and  wisely. 

There  are  again,  some  attributes,  which  can,  in  nowise, 
have  an  egress,  or  be  exercised  without  an  object  prede- 
termined, and,  as  it  were,  by  some  circumstances  prepared 
for  them  :  among  these  is  punitive  justice  ;  for  the  exercise 
of  which  there  would  be  no  ground,  but  upon  the  suppo- 
sition of  the  existence  of  a  rational  being,  and  its  having 
sinned  ;  but  these  being  supposed,  this  justice  must  neces- 
sarily act  according  to  its  own  rule. 

2.  But  that  rule  is  not  any  free  act  of  the  divine  will,  but 
a  supreme,  intrinsic,  natural  right  of  Deity,  conjoined  with 
wisdom,  to  which  the  entire  exercise  of  this  justice  ought  to 
be  reduced.  These  men,  entirely  trifle  then,  who,  devising 
certain  absurd  conclusions  of  their  own,  annex  them  to  a 
supposition  of  the  necessity  of  punitive  justice  as  to  its  ex- 
ercise :  as  for  instance,  that  God  ought  to  punish  sin  to  the 
full  extent  of  his  power,  and  that  he  ought  to  punish  every 
sin  with  eternal  punishment,  and  that  therefore  he  must 
preserve  every  creature  that  sins  to  eternity,  and  that  he 
cannot  do  otherwise,  I  say  they  trifle  ;  for  God  does  not 
punish  to  the  utmost  extent  of  his  power,  but,  so  far  as  is 
just;  and  all  modes  and  degrees  of  punishment  are  deter- 
mined by  the  standard  of  the  divine  right  and  wisdom. 

Whether  that  necessarily  requires  that  every  sin  should 
be  punished  with  eternal  punishment,  let  those  inquire  who 
choose.     '  Nobis  non  licet  esse  tarn  disertis.' 

3.  But  the  existence  of  a  rational  creature,  and  the  moral 
dependance  which  it  has,  and  must  have  upon  God,  being- 
supposed,  the  first  egress  of  this  justice  is  in  the  constitution 


3G0        A     DISSERTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

of  a  penal  law  ;  not  as  a  law  which,  as  was  before  observed, 
originates  from  the  justice  of  government,  but  as  a  penal  law. 
For  if  such  a  law  were  not  made  necessarily,  it  might  be 
possible  that  God,  should  lose  his  natural  right  and  domi- 
nion over  his  creatures,  and  thus  he  would  not  be  God;  or, 
that  right  being  established,  that  the  creature  might  not  be 
subject  to  him,  which  implies  a  contradiction,  not  less,  than 
if  you  were  to  say,  that  Abraham  is  the  father  of  Isaac,  but 
that,  Isaac  is  not  the  son  of  Abraham.  For,  in  case  of  a 
failure  in  point  of  obedience  (a  circumstance  which  might 
happen,  and  really  hath  happened),  that  dependance  could 
be  continued  in  no  way,  but  through  means  of  a  vicarious 
punishment :  and  there  must  have  been  a  penal  law  consti- 
tuted, necessarily  requiring  that  punishment.  Hence  arises 
a  secondary  right  of  punishing,  which  extends  to  every  am- 
plification of  that  penal  law,  in  whatever  manner  made.  But 
it  has  a  second  egress  in  the  infliction  of  punishment. 

4.  And  here  it  is  to  be  remarked,  that  this  justice  ne- 
cessarily respects  punishment  in  general,  as  including  in  it 
the  nature  of  punishment,  and  ordaining  such  a  vindication 
of  the  divine  honour,  as  God  can  acquiesce  in  :  not  the 
time,  or  degrees,  or  such  like  circumstances  of  punishment. 
Yea,  not  this,  or  that  species  of  punishment ;  for  it  respects 
only  the  preservation  of  God's  natural  right,  and  the  vindi- 
cation of  his  glory  ;  both  which  may  be  done  by  punish- 
ment in  general,  however  circumstanced.  A  dispensation, 
therefore,  with  punishment  (especially  temporary  punish- 
ment) by  a  delay  of  time,  an  increase  or  diminution  of  the 
degree,  by  no  means  prejudiceth  the  necessity  of  the  exer- 
cise of  this  justice,  which  only  intends  an  infliction  of  pu- 
nishment in  general. 

5.  But  again,  though  we  determine  the  egresses  of  this 
justice  to  be  necessary,  we  do  not  deny  that  God  exercises 
it  freely  :  for  that  necessity  doth  not  exclude  a  concomitant 
liberty,  but  only  an  antecedent  indifference.  This  only  we 
deny,  viz.  that,  supposing  a  sinful  creature,  the  will  of  God 
can  be  indifferent  (by  virtue  of  the  punitive  justice  inherent 
in  it)  to  inflict,  or  not  inflict  punishment  upon  that  creature, 
or  to  the  volition  of  punishment,  or  its  opposite.  The 
whole  of  Scripture,  indeed,  loudly  testifies  against  any 
such  indifference ;  nor  is  it  consistent  with  God's  supreme 


A    DISSERTATION     ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.        361 

right  over  his  creatures  :  neither  do  they  who  espouse  a 
different  side,  contend  with  a  single  word  brought  from  the 
Scriptures.  But  that  God  punishes  sins  with  a  concomitant 
liberty,  because  he  is  of  all  agents  the  most  free,  we  have 
not  a  doubt.  Thus  his  intellectual  will  is  carried  towards 
happiness  by  an  essential  inclination  antecedent  to  liberty, 
and  notwithstanding  it  wills  happiness  with  a  concomitant 
liberty  :  for  to  act  freely  is  the  very  nature  of  the  will;  yea, 
it  must  necessarily  '^.d  fteely. 

Let  our  adversaries  therefore  dream  as  they  please,  that 
we  determine  God  to  be  an  absolutely  necessary  agent, 
when  he  is  a  most  free  one  ;  and  that  his  will  is  so  circum- 
scribed by  some  kind  of  justice,  which  we  maintain,  that 
he  cannot  will  those  things  which,  settino;  the  consideration 
of  that  justice  aside,  would  be  free  to  him.  For,  we  ac- 
knowledge the  Deity  to  be  both  a  necessary  and  free  agent : 
necessary  in  respect  of  all  his  actions,  internally,  or  in  re- 
spect of  the  persons  in  the  godhead  towards  one  another  : 
the  Father  necessarily  begets  the  Son  and  loves  himself:  as 
to  these  and  such  like  actions,  he  is  of  all  necessary  agents 
the  most  necessary.  But  in  respect  of  the  acts  of  the  divine 
will,  which  have  their  operations  and  effects  upon  external 
objects,  he  is  an  agent  absolutely  free,  being  one  '  who 
worketh  all  things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.' 
But  of  these  acts  there  are  two  kinds;  for  some  are  abso- 
lute and  admit  no  respect  to  any  antecedent  condition. 

Of  this  kind  is  his  purpose  of  creating  the  world,  and  in 
it  rational  creatures,  properly  adapted  to  know  and  obey  the 
creator,  benefactor,  and  Lord  of  all.  In  works  of  this  kind, 
God  hath  exercised  the  greatest  liberty  :  his  infinitely  wise 
and  infinitely  free  will  is  the  fountain  and  origin  of  all 
things.  Neither  is  there  in  God  any  kind  of  justice,  or  any 
other  essential  attribute,  which  could  prescribe  any  limits 
or  measure  to  the  divine  will.  But  this  decree  of  creating 
being  supposed,  the  divine  will  undergoes  a  double  neces- 
sity, so  to  speak,  both  in  respect  of  the  event,  and  in  re- 
spect of  its  manner  of  acting.  For  in  respect  of  the  event, 
it  is  necessary,  from  the  immutability  of  God,  that  the  world 
should  be  created  :  and  in  respect  of  the  manner  of  doing  it, 
that  it  should  be  done  omnipotently,  because  God  is  esserj- 
tially  omnipotent ;  and  it  being  once  supposed  that  he  wills 

VOL.    IX.  2    B 


362       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

to  do  any  work  without  himself,  he  must  do  it  omnipotently. 
Yet,  notwithstanding  these  considerations,  in  the  creation  of 
the  world,  God  was  entirely  a  free  agent:  he  exercised  will 
and  understanding  in  acting,  although  the  choice  of  acting 
or  not  acting,  and  of  acting  in  one  particular  way  or  another, 
is  taken  away  by  his  immutability  and  omnipotence. 

There  is  another  kind  of  the  acts  of  the  divine  will, 
which  could  have  no  possible  existence  but  upon  a  condition 
supposed. 

This  kind  contains  the  egresses  and  exercise  of  those  at- 
tributes which  could  not  be  exercised  but  upon  a  supposition 
of  other  antecedent  acts  ;  of  which  we  have  treated  before. 
Of  this  kind,  are  all  the  acts  of  the  divine  will,  in  which 
justice,  mercy,  &c.  exert  their  energy.  But  these  attributes 
of  the  divine  nature  are,  either  for  the  purpose  of  preserving 
or  continuing  to  God  what  belongs  to  him  of  right,  supposing 
that  state  of  things  which  he  hath  freely  appointed  ;  or  for 
bestowing  on  his  creatures  some  farther  good.  Of  the 
former  kind  is  vindicatory  justice,  which,  as  it  cannot  be 
exercised  but  upon  the  supposition  of  the  existence  of  a 
rational  being,  and  of  its  sin  ;  so,  these  being  supposed,  the 
supreme  right  and  dominion  of  the  Deity  could  not  be  pre- 
served entire,  unless  it  were  exercised.  Of  the  latter  kind 
is  sparing  mercy,  by  which  God  bestows  an  undeserved 
good  on  miserable  creatures.  For  setting  aside  the  consi- 
deration of  their  misery,  this  attribute  cannot  be  exercised  ; 
but  that  being  supposed,  if  he  be  inclined  to  bestow  any 
undeserved  good  on  creatures  wretched  through  their  own 
transgression,  he  may  exercise  this  mercy,  if  he  will.  But 
again,  in  the  exercise  of  that  justice,  although  if  it  were  not 
to  be  exercised,  according  to  our  former  hypothesis,  God 
VKOuld  cease  from  his  right  and  dominion,  and  so  would  not 
be  God,  still  he  is  a  free,  and  not  an  absolutely  necessary 
agent;  for,  he  acts  from  will  and  understanding,  and  not 
from  an  impetus  of  nature  only,  as  fire  burns  :  and  he  freely 
willed  that  state  and  condition  of  things,  which  being  sup- 
posed, that  justice  must  necessarily  be  exercised.  Therefore, 
in  the  exercise  of  it,  he  is  not  less  free  than  in  speaking; 
for,  supposing,  as  I  said  before,  that  his  will  were  to  speak 
any  thing,  it  is  necessary  that  he  speak  the  truth.  These 
loud  outcries,  therefore,  which  the  adversaries  so  unseason- 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  363 

ably  make  against  our  opinion,  as  if  it  determined  God  to 
be  an  absolutely  necessary  agent  in  his  operations  ad  extra, 
entirely  vanish  and  come  to  nought.  But  we  will  treat 
more  fully  of  these  things,  when  we  come  to  answer  ob- 
jections. 

Finally,  let  it  be  observed,  that  the  nature  of  mercy  and 
justice  are  different  in  respect  of  their  exercise;  for,  be- 
tween the  act  of  mercy  and  its  object,  no  natural  obligation 
intervenes  :  for  God  is  not  bound  to  any  one,  to  exercise 
any  act  of  mercy,  neither  is  he  bound  to  reward  obedience  : 
for  this  is  a  debt  due  from  his  natural  right,  and  from  the 
moral  dependence  of  the  rational  creature,  and  indispensably 
thence  arising.  But  between  the  act  of  justice  and  its  ob- 
ject, a  natural  obligation  intervenes,  arising  from  the  indis- 
pensable subordination  of  the  creature  to  God,  which  sup- 
posing disobedience  or  sin,  could  not  otherwise  be  secured 
than  by  punishment.  Nor  is  the  liberty  of  the  divine  will 
diminished  in  any  respect  more  by  the  necessary  egresses  of 
divine  justice,  than  by  the  exercise  of  other  attributes  :  for 
these  necessary  egresses  are  the  consequence,  not  of  an  ab- 
solute, but  of  a  conditional  necessity  ;  viz.  a  rational  crea- 
ture and  its  sin  being  supposed,  and  both  existing  freely  in 
respect  of  God  ;  but  the  necessary  suppositions  being  made, 
the  exercise  of  other  perfections  is  also  necessary ;  for  it 
being  supposed,  that  God  were  disposed  to  speak  with  man, 
he  must  necessarily  speak  according  to  truth. 


2   B  2 


364         A     DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 


CHAP.  III. 

A  series  of  arguments  in  support  of  vindicatory  justice.  First,  from  the 
Scriptures.  Three  divisions  of  the  passages  of  Scripture.  The  first,  con- 
tains those  which  respect  the  purity  and  holiness  of  God.  The  second, 
those  which  respect  God  us  the  judge.'  What  it  is  to  judge  with  justice. 
The  third,  those  which  respect  the  divine  supreme  right.  A  second  argu- 
ment is  taken  from  the  general  consent  of  mankind.  A  three-fold  testi- 
mony of  that  conse7it.  The  first,  from  the  Sci'iptures.  Some  testimonies 
of  the  heathens.  The  second,  from  the  poiier  of  conscience.  Testimonies 
concerning  that  power.  The  mark  set  upon  Cain.  The  expression  of  the 
Emperor  Adrinn,  when  at  the  point  of  death.  The  consternation  of  man- 
hind  at  prodigies.  The  horror  of  the  wicked,  whom  even  fictions  terrify. 
Two  conclusions.  The  third  testimony,  from  the  confession  of  all  nations. 
A  vindication  of  the  argmnent  against  Rutherford.  The  regard  paid 
to  saci'ifices  among  the  nations.  Different  kinds  of  the  same.  Propitia- 
tory sacrifices.     Some  instances  of  them. 

These  preliminaries  being  thus  laid  down  to  facilitate  our 
entrance  on  the  subject,  I  proceed  to  demonstrate,  by  a  va- 
riety of  arguments,  both  against  enemies,  and  against  friends 
from  whom  I  dissent,  that  this  punitive  justice  is  natural  to 
God,  and  necessary  as  to  its  egresses  respecting  sin.  But 
because,  since  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  woi'ld,  God  hath 
either  continued,  or  increased  the  knowledge  of  himself,  or 
accommodated  it  to  our  capacities  by  four  ways,  namely,  by 
the  written  word,  by  a  rational  conscience,  by  his  works  of 
providence ;  and  lastly,  by  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ  his 
only-begotten  Son,  and  by  the  mystery  of  godliness  mani- 
fested in  him ;  we  will  shew,  that  by  each  of  these  modes 
of  communication  he  hath  revealed  and  made  known  to  us 
this  his  justice.  Our  first  argument  then  is  taken  from  the 
testimony  of  the  sacred  writings,  which  in  almost  number- 
less places  ascribe  this  vindicatory  justice  to  God. 

The  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  which  ascribe  this  jus- 
tice to  God,  may  be  classed  under  three  divisions.  The  first 
contains  those  which  certify,  '  that  the  purity  and  holiness 
of  God,  hostilely  oppose  and  detest  sin.  Whether  holiness 
or  purity  be  an  attribute  natural  to  God,  and  immutably  re- 
siding in  him,  has  not  yet  been  called  in  question  by  our 
adversaries.  They  have  not  yet  arrived  at  such  a  pitch  of 
madness.      But  this  is   that  universal   perfection  of  God, 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         365 

which,  when  he  exercises  in  punishing  the  transgressions  of 
his  creatures,  is  called  vindicatory  justice.  For  whatever 
there  be  in  God  perpetually  inherent,  whatever  excellence 
there  be  essential  to  his  nature,  which  occasions  his  dis- 
pleasure with  sin,  and  which  necessarily  occasions  this  dis- 
pleasure, this  is  that  justice  of  which  we  are  speaking. 

But  here  first  occurs  to  us  that  celebrated  passage  of  the 
prophet  Habakkuk,  chap.  i.  15.  '  Thou  art  of  purer  eyes 
than  to  behold  evil,  and  canst  not  look  on  iniquity.'  The 
prophet  here  ascribes  to  God  the  greatest  detestation,  and 
such  an  immortal  hatred  of  sin,  that  he  cannot  look  upon 
it;  but,  with  a  wrathful  aversion  of  his  countenance  abomi- 
nates and  dooms  it  to  punishment.  But  perhaps  God  thus 
hates  sin,  because  he  wills  it ;  and  by  an  act  of  his  will,  en- 
tirely free,  though  the  state  of  things  might  be  changed, 
without  any  injury  to  him,  or  diminution  of  his  essential 
glory.  But  the  Holy  Spirit  gives  us  a  reason  very  different 
from  this,  viz.  The  purity  of  God's  eyes  :  'thou  art  of  purer 
eyes  than  to  behold  evil.'  But  there  is  no  one  who  can 
doubt  that  the  prophet  here  intended  the  holiness  of  God  : 
the  incomprehensible,  infinite,  and  most  perfect  holiness  or 
purity  of  God,  is  the  cause  why  he  hates  and  detests  all  sin  ; 
and,  that  justice  and  holiness  are  the  same  as  to  the  com- 
mon and  general  notion  of  them,  we  have  shewn  before. 

Of  the  same  import  is  the  admonition  of  Joshua  in  his 
address  to  the  people  of  Israel,  chap.  xxiv.  19.  'Ye  cannot 
serve  the  Lord ;'  (that  is,  he  will  not  accept  of  a  false  and 
hypocritical  worship  from  you)  '  for  he  is  a  holy  God  ;  he  is 
a  jealous  God;  he  will  not  forgive  your  transgressions,  nor 
your  sins.'  God  then  will  not  forgive  transgressions,  that 
is,  he  will  most  certainly  punish  them,  because  he  is  most 
holy.  But  this  holiness  is  the  universal  perfection  of  God, 
which,  when  exercised  in  punishing  the  sins  of  the  creatures, 
is  called  vindicatory  justice;  that  is,  in  relation  to  its  ex- 
ercise and  eff'ects  ;  for  in  reality  the  holiness  and  justice  of 
God  are  the  same  ;  neither  of  which,  considered  in  itself  and 
absolutely,  differs  from  the  divine  nature ;  whence  they  are 
frequently  used  the  one  for  the  other. 

Moreover,  it  is  manifest,  that  God  meant  this  holiness  in 
that  promulgation  of  his  glorious  name,  or  of  the  essential 
properties  of  his  divine  nature,  made  face  to  face,  to  Moses, 


366       A    DISSERTATION    OJST    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

in  Exod.  xxxiv.  5.  7.  which  name  he  had  also  before  de- 
clared; chap,  xxiii.  7.  That  non-absolution  or  punishment 
denotes  an  external  effect  of  the  divine  will,  is  granted  :  but 
when  God  proclaims  this  to  be  his  name,  '  The  Lord,  the 
Lord  God,  &,c.  that  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty,'  he 
manifestly  leads  us  to  the  contemplation  of  that  excellence 
essentially  inherent  in  his  nature,  which  induces  him  to  such 
an  act :  but  that,  by  whatever  name  it  be  distinguished  in 
condescension  to  our  capacities,  is  the  justice  that  we  mean. 
That  eulogium  of  divine  justice  by  the  psalmist,  Psal. 
V.  54.  6.  favours  this  opinion.  'For  thou  art  not  a  God 
that  hast  pleasure  in  wickedness  :  neither  shall  evil  dwell 
with  thee :  the  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  thy  sight :  thou 
hatest  all  the  workers  of  iniquity  :  thou  shalt  destroy  them 
that  speak  leasing  :  the  Lord  will  abhor  the  bloody  and  de- 
ceitful man.'  But  those  who  deny  this  hatred  of  sin  and 
sinners,  and  the  disposition  to  punish  them,  to  be  perpetually, 
immutably,  and  habitually  inherent  in  God,  I  am  afraid  have 
never  strictly  weighed  in  their  thoughts  the  divine  purity 
and  holiness. 

To  the  second  class  may  be  referred  those  passages  of 
Scripture  which  ascribe  to  God  the  office  of  a  judge,  and 
which  affirm  that  he  judges,  and  will  judge,  all  things  with 
justice.  The  first  which  occurs  is  that  celebrated  expression 
of  Abraham,  Gen,  xviii.  25.  *  Shall  not  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth  do  right?'  These  are  not  the  words  of  one  who  doubts, 
but  of  one  enforcing  a  truth  acknowledged  and  confessed 
among  all ;  a  truth  upon  which  the  intercession  of  this  faith- 
ful friend  of  God,  for  the  pious  and  just  inhabitants  of 
Sodom  is  founded  :  for  Abraham  here  ascribes  to  God  the 
power  and  office  of  a  just  judge  ;  in  consequence  of  which 
character,  he  must  necessarily  exercise  judgment  according 
to  the  different  merits  of  mankind.  This,  the  words  in  the 
preceding  clause  of  the  verse,  accompanied  with  a  vehement 
rejection  and  detestation  of  every  suspicion  that  might 
arise  to  the  contrary,  sufficiently  demonstrate,  'that be  far 
from  thee  to  do,  viz.  to  slay  the  righteous  with  the  wicked.' 
God  then  is  a  judge  and  a  just  one  :  and  it  is  impossible  for 
him  not  to  exercise  right  or  judgment.  But  that  justice 
Vv'herevvith  he  is  now  endowed,  and  by  which  he  exerciseth 
right,  is  not  a  free  act  of  his  will  (for  who  would  entertain 


A    DISSERTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         367 

such  contemptible  thoughts  even  of  an  earthly  judge)  but  a 
habit  or  excellence  at  all  times  inherent  in  his  nature. 

But  this  supreme  excellence  and  general  idea  which 
Abraham  made  mention  of  and  enforced,  the  apostle  again 
afterward  supports  and  recommends,  Rom.  iii.  5,  6.  '  Is 
God  unrighteous  who  taketh  vengeance?  God  forbid,  for 
then  how  shall  God  judge  the  world  V  Unless  he  were  just, 
how  shall  he  judge  the  world  ?  Therefore  this  most  righteous 
of  all  judges,  exerciseth  justice  in  judging  the  world  'be- 
cause he  is  just.' 

For  why  should  God  so  often  be  said  to  judge  the  world 
justly  and  in  justice,  unless  his  justice  were  that  perfection, 
whence  this  righteous  and  just  judgment  flows  and  is  de- 
rived ;  Acts  xvii.  31.  'he  hath  appoiated  a  day,  in  the  which 
he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  that  man  whom 
he  hath  ordained  :' — and  in  Rom.  ii.  5.  the  day  of  the  last 
judgment  is  called, '  the  day  of  wrath,  and  of  the  revelation 
of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God.' 

But  again,  on  this  very  account  the  justice  of  God  is  ce- 
lebi-ated,  and  he  himself,  in  an  especial  manner,  is  said  to  be 
just,  because  he  inflicts  punishment,  and  exercises  his  judg- 
ments according  to  the  demerits  of  sinners.  Rev.  xvi.  5,  6. 
'  Thou  art  righteous,  O  Lord,  which  art,  and  wast,  and  shalt 
be,  because  thou  hast  judged  thus;  for  they  have  shed  the 
blood  of  saints  and  prophets,  and  thou  hast  given  them  blood 
to  drink  ;  for  they  are  worthy.' 

But  all  retaliation  for  a  crime  proceeds  from  vindicatory 
justice;  but  that  God  exercises  that  justice,  and  is  thence 
denominated  just,  is  evident.  The  Holy  Spirit  establishes 
this  truth  in  the  plainest  words,  Psal.  ix.  4,  5.  where  he 
gloriously  vindicates  this  justice  of  God, — '  Thou  hast  main- 
tained my  right  and  my  cause,'  says  the  psalmist,  'thou 
sattest  on  the  throne  judging  right.  Thou  hast  rebuked 
the  heathen,  thou  hast  destroyed  the  wicked,  thou  hast  put 
out  their  name  for  ever  and  ever.'  God  exerciseth  justice 
and  determines  causes,  as  he  sits  upon  his  throne,  that  is,  as 
being  endowed  with  supreme  judiciary  power,  and  that,  as 
he  is  a  judge  of  righteousness,  ormost  righteousjudge.  Psal. 
cxix.  137.  'Righteous  art  thou,  O  Lord,  and  upright  are  thy 
judgments.' 

It  now  remains,  that  we   take  a  view  of  one  or  two  of 


368       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

those  passages  of  Scripture  which,  in  consideration  of  this 
divine  justice,  assert  the  infliction  of  punishment  for  sin  in 
itself,  and  as  far  as  relates  to  the  thing  itself  to  be  just.  To 
this  purpose  is  that  of  the  apostle  to  the  Rom.  chap.  i.  34. 
'  Who  knowing  the  judgment,  or  justice,  of  God,  that  they 
which  commit  such  things  are  worthy  of  death.'  Whatever, 
or  of  what  kind  soever  that  justice  or  right  of  God  may  be, 
of  which  the  apostle  is  speaking,  it  seems  evident  that  the 
three  following  properties  belong  to  it. 

1.  That  it  is  universally  acknowledged,  nay,  it  is  not  un- 
known, even  to  the  most  abandoned  of  mankind,  and  to  those 
schools  of  every  kind  of  wickedness  which  the  apostle  is 
there  describing.  Whence  they  derive  this  knowledge  of 
the  divine  law  and  justice,  shall  be  made  appear  hereafter. 

2.  Thatisthecause,  source,  and  rule  of  all  punishments,  to 
be  inflicted.  For  this  is  the  right  of  God,  '  that  those  who 
commit  sin  are  worthy  of  death.'  From  this  right  of  God  it 
follows,  '  that  the  wages  of  every  sin  is  death.' 

3.  That  it  is  natural  and  essential  to  God.  For  although  in 
respect  of  its  exercise,  it  may  have  a  handle,  or  occasion, 
from  some  things  external  to  the  Deity,  and  in  respect  of 
its  effects  may  have  a  meritorious  cause,  yet  in  respect  of  its 
source  and  root,  it  respects  himself,  as  its  subject,  if  God  be 
absolutely  perfect :  if  belonging  to  any  other  being,  it  can- 
not agree  to  him. 

You  will  say  that  this  right  of  God  is  free  :  but  I  deny, 
that  any  right  of  God,  which  respects  his  creatures,  can,  as 
a  habit  inherent  in  his  nature,  be  free,  though  in  the  exercise 
of  every  right,  God  be  absolutely  free  ;  neither  can  any  free 
act  of  the  divine  will  towards  creatures  be  called  any  right 
of  Deity,  it  is  only  the  exercise  of  some  right.  But  an  act 
is  distinguished  from  its  habit  or  root. 

And  now  it  appears  evident,  that  this  right  is  not  that 
supreme  right  or  absolute  dominion  of  God,  which,  under 
the  primary  notion  of  a  Creator,  must  be  necessarily  as- 
cribed to  him  ;  for  it  belongs  not  to  the  supreme  Lord,  as 
such  to  inflict  punishment,  but  as  ruler  or  judge. 

The  supreme  dominion  and  right  of  God  over  his  crea- 
tures, no  doubt,  so  far  as  it  supposes  dependence  and  obe- 
dience, necessarily  requires  that  a  vicarious  punishment 
should  be  appointed,  in  case oftransgression  or  disobedience; 


A     DISSERTATION    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.        369 

but  the  very  appointment  of  punishment,  as  well  as  the  in- 
fliction of  it,  flows  from  his  right  as  the  governor ;  which 
right,  considered  with  respect  to  transgressions,  is  nothing 
else  than  vindicatory  justice.  The  apostle  therefore  signi- 
fies that,  that  is,  the  justice  always  resident  in  God  as  a  le- 
gislator, ruler,  and  judge  of  all  things,  which  by  common 
presumption,  even  the  most  abandoned  of  mankind  acknow- 
ledge. 

To  these  may  be  added  two  other  passages  which  occur 
in  the  writings  of  the  same  apostle;  2  Thess.  i.  6.  *  Seeii^g 
it  is  a  righteous  thing  with  God  to  recompense  tribulation 
to  them  that  trouble  you  ;'  a  recompense  of  tribulation  is  a 
real  peculiar  act  of  vindicatory  justice  ;  but  that  belongs  to 
God  as  he  is  just.  Thence  the  punishment  of  sin  is  called 
in  Heb.  ii.  2.  '  a  just  recompense  of  reward,' and  by  Jude  7. 
*the  vengeance,  or  justice,  of  eternal  fire.'  Because,  viz. 
it  follows  from  that  justice  of  God,  that  such  crimes  are 
justly  recompensed  by  such  a  punishment. 

But  we  will  not  be  farther  troublesome  in  reciting  par- 
ticular proofs ;  from  those  already  mentioned,  and  from 
others  equally  strong,  we  thus  briefly  argue;  that  to  that 
being,  whose  property  it  is  '  to  render  unto  every  one  accord- 
ing to  his  works,'  not  to  clear  the  guilty,  to  condemn  sin- 
ners worthy  of  death,  and  to  inflict  the  same  upon  them,  to 
hate  sin,  and  who  will  in  no  wise  let  sin  pass  unpunished, 
and  all  this,  because  he  is  just,  and  because  his  justice  so 
requires,  sin-punishing  justice  naturally  belongs,  and  that 
he  cannot  act  contrary  to  that  justice. 

But  the  passages  of  Scripture  just  now  mentioned,  with 
many  others,  assert  that  all  these  properties  above  recounted, 
belong  to  and  are  proper  to  God,  because  he  is  just :  there- 
fore, this  justice  belongs  to  God,  and  is  natural  to  him. 

It  matters  not  what  we  affirm  of  vindicatory  justice  ; 
whether  that  it  be  meant  of  God  essentially,  and  not  only 
denominatively,  that  it  has  an  absolute  name  (for  it  is  called 
holiness  and  purity)  that  we  have  it  expressed  both  in  the 
abstract  and  concrete  ;  for  wheit  is  more  than  that,  it  is  af- 
firmed expressly,  directly,  and  particularly,  oft-times  in  the 
passages  above-mentioned,  that  it  requires  the  punishment 
of  sinners,  that  it  implies  a  constant  and  immutable  will  of 


370  A     DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

punishing  every  sin  according  to  the  rule  of  divine  wisdom 
and  right :  impudent  to  a  high  degree  indeed  then  must  So- 
cinus  have  been,  who  hath  maintained  that,  that  perfection 
of  Deity  by  which  he  punisheth  sin,  is  not  called  justice,  but 
always  anger  or  fury.  Anger  indeed  and  fury,  analogically 
and  effectively,  belong  to  justice. 

So  much  for  our  first  argument. 

The  universal  consent  of  mankind  furnishes  us  with  a 
second  ;  from  which  we  may  reason  in  this  manner :  What 
common  opinions  and  the  innate  conceptions  of  all  assign 
to  God,  that  is  natural  to  God.  But  'this  corrective  justice 
is  so  assigned  to  God;  therefore  this  justice  is  natural  to  God. 

The  major  proposition  is  evident ;  for  what  is  not  natural 
to  God,  neither  exists  in  him  by  any  mode  of  habit,  or  mode 
of  affection,  but  is  only  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will ;  and  the 
knowledge  of  that  can  by  no  means  be  naturally  implanted 
in  creatures :  for  whence  should  there  be  a  universal  pre- 
vious conception  of  an  act  which  might  either  take  place,  or 
never  take  place.  No  such  thing  was  at  the  first  engraven 
on  the  hearts  of  men,  and  the  fabric  of  the  world  teaches  us 
no  such  thing. 

But  the  minor  proposition  is  established  by  a  three-fold 
proof.  1.  By  the  testimony  of  the  Scripture.  2.  By  the 
testimony  of  every  sinner's  conscience.  3.  And  by  that  of 
the  public  consent  of  all  nations. 

The  Holy  Scriptures  testify  that  such  an  innate  concep- 
tion is  implanted  by  God  in  the  minds  of  men.  Thus  the 
apostle  to  the  Romans,  chap.i.  32.  '  who  knowing  the  judg- 
ment of  God,  that  they  who  do  such  things  are  worthy  of 
death.'  He  is  here  speaking  of  those  nations  that  were  the 
most  forsaken  by  God,  and  delivered  over  to  a  reprobate 
mind  :  yet  even  to  these  he  ascribes  some  remaining  know- 
ledge of  this  immutable  right  of  God,  which  renders  it  ne- 
cessary, that  'every  transgression  should  receive  its  just  re- 
compense of  reward,'  and  that  sinners  should  be  deserving 
of  death  in  such  a  manner,  that  it  would  be  unworthy  of  God 
not  to  inflict  it ;  that  is  to  say,  although  the  operations  of 
this  observing  and  acknowledging  principle  should  often 
become  very  languid,  and  be  even  almost  entirely  over- 
whelmed, by  abounding  wickedness;  for 'what  they  know 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         371 

naturally  as  brute  beasts,  in  those  things  they  corrupt  them- 
selves/yet,  that  mankind  must  cease  to  exist  before  they  can 
altogether  lose  this  innate  sense  of  divine  right  and  judg- 
ment. Hence  the  barbarians  conclude  against  Paul,  then  a 
prisoner,  and  in  bonds,  seeing  the  viper  hanging  on  one  of 
his  hands,  that '  no  doubt  he  was  a  murderer,  whom,  though 
he  had  escaped  the  sea,  yet  vengeance  suffered  not  to  live.' 
Here  they  argue,  from  the  effect  to  the  cause,  which  in  mat- 
ters relating  to  moral  good  or  evil,  they  could  not,  unless 
convinced  in  their  consciences,  that  there  is  an  inviolable 
connexion  between  sin  and  punishment,  which  thej^  here 
ascribe  to  justice. 

Evidences  of  God's  justice,  from  Pagan  writers. 

Justice  among  them,  according  to  their  fabulous  theo- 
logy, which  was  particularly  favoured  by  the  bulk  of  the 
people,  was  the  daughter  of  Jupiter,  whom  he  set  over  the 
affairs  of  mortals,  to  avenge  the  injuries  which  they  should 
do  to  one  another,  and  to  infljict  condign  punishment  on  all 
those  who  should  impiously  offend  against  the  gods. 

Hence,  Hesiod  speaking  of  Jupiter,  says. 

He  married  a  second  wife,  the  fair  Themis,  who  brought  forth  the  Hours, 

And  Eunomia,  and  Justice,  &c. 

Who  should  watch  o'er  the  actions  of  mortal  men. — Hesiod  in  Theog. 

Again,  the  same  author  says. 

Justice  is  a  virgin,  descended  from  Jupiter, 
Chaste,  and  houour'd  by  tlie  heavenly  deities  J 
And  when  any  one  hath  injur'd  her, 
Indirectly  committing  the  injury,  &c. — Hesiod  inOper. 

Also,  Orpheus  in  the  hymns, 

I  sing  the  eye  of  Justice,  who  looketh  behind  her,  and  is  fair. 
Who  likewise  sits  upon  the  sacred  throne  of  sovereign  Jupiter, 
As  the  avenger  of  the  unjust. 

Hence,  these  common  sayings, 

God  hath  a  just  eye  ; 

God  hath  found  the  transgressor. 

In  all  which,  and  in  numberless  other  such  passages,  the 
wisest  men  in  those  times  of  ignorance,  have  announced  their 
sense  of  this  vindicatory  justice. 

And  among  the  Latins,  the  following  passages  prove  their 
sense  of  the  same. 

Aspiciunt  oculis,  &c. 

The  gods  above  beheld  the  affairs  of  mortals  with  impartial  eyes. 
Raro  antecedentem,  &c. 
Seldom  hath  punishment,  through  lameness  of  foot,  left  off  pursuit  of  the  wicked 
man,  though  he  hath  had  the  start  of  her. — Horace. 


372  A     DISSERTATION    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

Also,  that  celebrated  response  of  the  Delphic  Oracle,  re- 
corded by  -^lian : 

But  divine  justice  traces  out  the  sources  of  crin.es, 

Nor  can  it  be  avoided  even  by  the  descendants  of  Jupiter  ; 

But  it  liangs  over  the  heads  of  the  wicked  themselves,  and  over  the 

lieads  of  their 
Children  ;  and  one  disaster  to  their  race  is  followed  by  another. 

All  which  assert  this  vindicatory  justice. 

This  then,  as  Plutarch  says,  is  the  ancient  faith  of  man- 
kind ;  or  in  the  words  of  Aristotle,  '  opinion  concerning 
God,'  which  Dion  Prusaeensis  calls  *  a  very  strong  and  eternal 
persuasion,  from  time  immemorial  received,  and  still  remain- 
ing among  all  nations.' 

Secondly,  The  consciences  of  all  mankind  concur  to  cor- 
robate  this  truth  ;  but  the  cause  which  has  numberless  wit- 
nesses to  support  it,  cannot  fail.  Hence,  not  only  the  flight, 
hiding  places,  and  fig-leaf  aprons  of  our  primogenitor,  but 
every  word  of  dire  meaning  and  evil  omen,  as  terror,  horror, 
tremor,  and  whatever  else  harasses  guilty  mortals,  have  de- 
rived their  origin.  Conscious  to  themselves  of  their  wick- 
edness, and  convinced  of  the  divine  dominion  over  them, 
this  idea,  above  all,  dwells  in  their  minds,  that  he  with  whom 
they  have  to  do,  is  supremly  just,  and  the  avenger  of  all  sin. 
From  this  consideration,  even  the  people  of  God  have  been 
induced  to  believe,  that  death  must  inevitably  be  their  por- 
tion, should  they  be  but  for  once  sisted  in  his  presence. 
Not  that  the  mass  of  the  body  is  to  us  an  obscure  and  dark 
prison  (as  the  Platonists'  dream),  whence,  when  we  obtain  a 
view  of  divine  things,  being  formerly  enveloped  by  that 
mass,  it  is  immediately  suggested  to  the  mind,  that  the  bond 
of  union  between  mind  and  body  must  be  instantly  dis- 
solved. 

It  must  indeed  be  acknowledged,  that  through  sin  we 
have  been  transformed  into  worms,  moles,  bats,  and  owls; 
but  the  cause  of  this  general  fear  and  dismay  is  not  to  be 
derived  from  this  source. 

The  justice  and,  purity  of  God,  on  account  of  which  he 
can  bear  nothing  impure  or  filthy  to  come  into  his  presence, 
occurs  to  sinners  minds:  wherefore,  they  think  of  nothing 
else,  but  of  a  present  God,  of  punishment  prepared,  and  of 
deserved  penalties  to  be  immediately  inflicted.  .  The 
thought  of  the  Deity   bursting  in  upon   the   mind,  imme- 


A    DISSERTATION     ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.         373 

diately  every  sinner  stands  confessed  a  debtor,  a  guilty  and 
self-condemned  criminal.  Fetters,  prisons,  rods,  axes,  and 
fire,  without  delay,  and  without  end,  j-ise  to  his  view.  Whence 
some  have  judged  the  mark  set  upon  Cain  to  have  been 
some  horrible  tremor,  by  which,  being  continually  shaken 
and  agitated,  he  was  known  to  all.  Hence  too  these  follow- 
ing verses : 

Wliitherflyest  thouEnceladus?  Whatever  coasts  thou  shalt  arrive  on. 
Thou  wilt  always  be  under  the  eye  of  Jupiter, 

And  these, 

'  As  every  one's  conscience  is,  so  in  his  heart  he  conceives 
hope  or  fear,  according  to  his  actions. 

' This  is  the  firts^  punishment,  that  even  in  his  own 

judgment,  no  guilty  person  is  acquitted. 

' You  may  think  that  we  have  passed  over  those 

whom  a  guilty  conscience  holds  abashed,  and  lashes  with 
its  inexorable  scourge ;  the  mind,  the  executioner  shaking 
the  secret  lash.' — See  Voss.  on  Idol,  book  i.  chap.  2. 

It  is  the  saying  of  a  certain  author,  that  punishment  is 
coeval  with  injustice;  and,  that  the  horror  of  natural  con- 
science is  not  terminated  by  the  limits  of  human  life. 

Sunt  aliquid  manes :  lethum  non  omnia  fiiiit, 
Lucida  que  evictos  eiFugit  umbra  rogos. 

The  soul  is  something,  denth  ends  not  at  ail, 

And  the  light  spirit  escapes  the  vanquished  funeral  pile. 

Hence  tKe  famous  verses  of  Adrian,  the  Roman  Empe- 
ror, spoken  on  his  death-bed  : 

Animula  vagula,  blandula, 
Hospes  comesque  corporis, 
Quae  nunc  abibis  in  loca? 
Pallidula,  rigida,  nudula. 
Nee  (at  soles)  dabis  joca. 

'  Alas,  my  soul,  thou  pleasing  companion  of  this  body, 
thou  fleeting  thing,  that  art  now  deserting  it !  Whither  art 
thou  flying?  To  what  unknown  scene  "^  All  trembling,  fear- 
ful, and  pensive  !  What  now  is  become  of  thy  former  wit 
and  humour?  Thou  shalt  jest  and  be  gay  no  more.' 

Translated  thus  by  Pope. 

Ah  fleeting  spirit;  wandering  fire. 

That  lung  hastwarra'd  luy  iciiuer  breast, 

Must  thou  no  mere  this  frame  inspire? 
No  more  a  pleasing  cheerful  guest  I 

a  Or,  Chief. 


374  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

Whither,  ah  whither  art  thou  flying  ! 

To  what  dark  undiscover'd  shore  ? 
Thou  seem'st  all  trembling,  shiv'ring,  dying, 

And  wit  and  humour  are  no  more  ! 

'  That  which  is  truly  evil,'  says  Tertullian,  '  not  even 
those  who  are  under  its  influence,  dare  defend  as  good. 
All  evil  fills  nature  with  fear,  or  shame.  Evil  doers  are  glad 
to  lie  concealed  ;  they  avoid  making  their  appearance :  they 
tremble  when  apprehended.'  Hence  the  Heathens  have  re- 
presented Jove  himself,  when  conscious  of  any  crime,  as  not 
free  from  fear.  We  find  Mercury  thus  speaking  of  him  in 
Plautus  : 

Etenim  iile,  &c. 

Even  that  Jupiter,  by  whose  order  1  come  hither. 

Dreads  evil  no  less  than  any  of  us : 

Being  himself  descended  from  a  human  father  and  mother, 

There  is  no  reason  to  wonder,  that  he  should  fear  for  himself. 

Hence  too,  mankind  have  a  dread  awe  of  every  thing  in 
nature  that  is  grand,  unusual,  and  strange;  as  thunders, 
lightenings,  or  eclipses  of  the  heavenly  bodies  ;  and  trem- 
ble at  every  prodigy,  spectre,  or  comet ;  nay,  even  at  the 
hob-goblins  of  the  night,  exclaiming,  like  the  woman  of 
Sarepta,  upon  the  death  of  her  son,  'What  have  I  to  do  with 
thee?  Art  thou  come  to  put  me  in  remembrance  of  my  ini- 
quities V  Hence,  even  the  most  abandoned  of  men,  when 
vengeance  for  their  sins  hangs  over  their  heads,  have  con- 
fessed their  sins,  and  acknowledged  the  divine  justice. 

It  is  related  by  Suetonius,  that  Nero,  that  disgrace  of 
human  nature,  just  before  his  death,  exclaimed,  'My  wife, 
my  mother,  and  my  father,  are  forcing  me  to  my  end."* 
Most  deservedly  celebrated  too  is  that  expression  of  Mau- 
ricius  the  Capadocian,  when  slain  by  Phocas,  'Just  art  thou, 
O  Lord,  and  thy  judgments  are  righteous.' 

But  moreover,  while  guilty  man  dreads  the  consequences 
of  evil,  which  he  knows  he  has  really  committed,  he  tor- 
ments and  vexes  himself  even  with  fictitious  fears  and  bug- 
bears :  hence  these  verses  of  Horace  ; 

<^  Somnia,  terrores  magicos,  miracula,  sagas, 
Nocturnos  lemures,  portenfaque  Thessala  fin.xit.     [rides  ?] 

*>  His  mother,  Agrippa,  had  poisoned  her  last  husband,  the  Emperor  Claudius, 
to  make  way  for  his  succession  ;  and  Nero  rewarded  her,  by  causing  her  to  be  mur- 
dered. He  likewise  caused  his'  wife,  Octavia,  and  his  tutor,  Seneca,  to  lose  their 
lives;  and  was,  in  every  respect,  perhaps  one  of  the  greatest  monsters  of  wickedr 
ness  that  ever  disgraced  human  nature. 

"  Hor.  Epis.  ii.  2.  208. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        376 

Ideas  for  the  most  part  ridiculous  ;  but  as  the  old  pro- 
verb says,  '  'Tis  but  reasonable  that  they  should  wear  the 
fetters  which  themselves  have  forged.'  Hence  the  guilty 
trembling  mob  is  imposed  upon,  and  cheated  by  impostors  : 
by  vagrant  fortune-tellers  and  astrologers.  If  any  illiterate 
juggler  shall  have  foretold  a  year  of  darkness,  alluding,  viz. 
to  the  night-season  of  the  year,  the  consternation  is  as  great, 
as  if  Hannibal  were  at  the  gates  of  the  city.  The  stings  of 
conscience  vex  and  goad  them,  and  their  minds  have  such 
presentiments  of  divine  justice,  that  they  look  upon  every 
new  prodigy  as  final,  or  portentous  of  the  final  consumma- 
tion. I  pass  over  observing,  at  present,  that,  if  once  a  con- 
viction of  the  guilt  of  any  sin  be  carried  home  to  the  mind, 
this  solemn  tribunal  cannot  thoroughly  be  dislodged  from 
any  man's  bosom,  either  by  dismal  solitude,  or  by  frequent 
company;  by  affluence  of  delicacies,  or  by  habits  of  wick- 
edness and  impiety ;  nor,  in  fine,  by  any  endeavours  after 
the  practice  of  innocence.  The  apostle  in  his  Epistle  to  the 
Romans,  chap.ii.  enters  more  fully  into  this  subject.  Two 
things,  then,  are  to  be  concluded  from  what  has  been  said 
that  mankind  are  guilty,  and  that  they  acknowledge. 

First.  That  God  hates  sin,  as  contrary  to  himself,  and  that 
therefore  it  is  impossible  for  a  sinner,  with  safety  to  appear 
before  him.  But  if  God  hate  sin,  he  does  it  either  from  his 
nature,  or  because  he  so  wills  it;  but  it  cannot  be  because 
he  wills  it,  for  in  that  case  he  might  not  will  it:  a  supposi- 
tion most  absurd.  And  indeed,  that  assertion  of  Socinus,  is 
every  way  barbarous,  abominable,  and  most  unworthy  of 
God,  wherein  he  says,  '  I  maintain  that  our  damnation  de- 
rives its  origin,  not  from  any  justice  of  God,  but  from  the 
free-will  of  God.'  Socinus  '  of  the  Saviour  ;'  chap.  8.  p.  3. 
But  if  God  hate  sin  by  nature,  then  by  nature  he  is  just,  and 
vindicatory  justice  is  natural  to  him. 

Secondly.  That  our  sins  are  debts,  and  therefore  we  shun 
the  sight  of  our  creditor.  But  I  mean  such  a  debt,  as  with 
relation  to  God's  supreme  dominion,  implies  in  it  a  perpetual 
right  of  punishment ;  and  such  is  the  second  proof  of  the  minor 
proposition  of  the  second  argument.  The  third  remains. 

The  public  consent  of  all  nations  furnishes  the  third 
proof  of  this  truth.  There  are  writers  indeed  who  have  af- 
firmed, a  thing  by  no  means  credible,  that  some  nations  have 


376         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

been  so  given  up  to  a  reprobate  mind,  that  they  acknow- 
ledge no  Deity.  Socinus  hath  written,  that  a  certain  Do- 
minican friar,  a  worthy  honest  man,  had  related  this  much 
to  himself  of  the  Brasilians,  and  other  natives  of  America. 
But  who  can  assure  us  that  this  friar  has  not  falsified,  ac- 
cording to  the  usual  custom  of  travellers,  or  that  Socinus 
himself  has  not  invented  this  story  (for  he  had  a  genius  fer- 
tile in  falsehoods),  to  answer  his  own  ends ;  but  let  this 
matter  rest  on  the  credit  of  Socinus,  who  was  but  little 
better  than  an  infidel.  But  nobody,  even  by  report,  hath 
heard  that  there  exist  any  who  have  acknowledged  the  being 
of  a  God,  and  who  have  not,  at  the  same  time,  declared  him 
to  be  just,  to  be  displeased  with  sinners  and  sin,  and  that  it 
is  the  duty  of  mankind  to  propitiate  him,  if  they  would  enjoy 
his  favour. 

But  a  respectable  writer  objects,  viz.  Rutherford  on  Pro- 
vidence, chap.  22.  p.  355.  That  this  argument,  that,  that 
which  men  know  of  God  by  the  natural  power  of  conscience, 
must  be  naturally  inherent  in  God,  is  of  no  weight;  *  for,' 
says  he,  '  by  the  natural  power  of  conscience,  men  know  that 
God  does  many  good  things  freely,  without  himself;  as  for 
instance,  that  he  has  created  the  world  ;  that  the  sun  rises 
and  gives  light ;  and  yet  in  these  operations  God  does  not 
act  from  any  necessity  of  nature.' 

But  this  learned  man  blunders  miserably  here,  as  often 
elsewhere,  in  his  apprehension  of  the  design  and  meaning  of 
his  opponents ;  for  they  do  not  use  this  argument  to  prove 
that  the  egresses  of  divine  justice  are  necessary,  but  that 
justice  itself  is  necessary  to  God,  which  Socinians  deny. 
What  is  his  answer  to  these  arguments?  Mankind  acknow- 
ledge many  things,  says  he,  which  God  does  freely.  To  be 
sure  they  do,  when  he  exhibits  them  before  their  eyes:  but 
what  follows  from  that  ?  so  too  they  acknowledge  that  God 
pii/iishes  sinj  when  he  punishes  it.  But  because  all  man- 
kind, fiom  the  works  of  God,  and  from  the  natural  power  of 
conscience,  acknowledge  God  to  be  good  and  bountiful,  we 
may,  without  hesitation,  conclude  goodness  and  bounty  to 
be  essential  attributes  of  God;  so  likewise,  because  from  the 
natural  power  of  conscience,  and  the  consideration  of  God's 
works  of  Providence,  they  conclude  and  agree  that  God  is 
just :  we  contend,  that  justice  is  natural  to  God. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.        377 

But  as  mankind  have  testified  this  consent  by  other  me- 
thods, so  they  have  especially  done  it  by  sacrifices  ;  concern- 
ing which,  Pliny  says,  'That  all  the  world  have  agreed  in 
them,  although  enemies  or  strangers  to  one  another.'  But 
since  these  are  plainly  of  a  divine  origin,  and  instituted  to 
prefigure  (so  to  speak)  the  true  atonement  by  the  blood  of 
Christ,  in  which  he  hath  been  the  Lamb  slain  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world  ;  that  is,  from  the  promise  made  of 
the  seed  of  the  woman,  and  from  the  sacrifice  of  Abel  which 
followed,  the  use  of  them  descended  to  all  the  posterity  of 
Adam ;  therefore,  though  afterward  the  whole  plan  and 
purpose  of  the  institution  was  lost,  among  by  far  the  greatest 
part  of  mankind,  and  even  the  true  God  himself,  to  whom 
alone  they  were  due,  was  unknown ;  and  though  no  traces 
of  the  thing  signified,  namely,  the  promised  seed  remained, 
yet  still  the  thing  itself,  and  the  general  notion  of  appeasing 
the  Deity  by  sacrifices,  hath  survived  all  the  darkness,  im- 
pieties, dreadful  wickedness,  punishments,  migrations  of 
nations,  downfalls,  and  destructions  of  cities,  states,  and 
people,  in  which  the  world  for  these  many  ages  hath  been 
involved.  For  a  consciousness  of  sin,  and  a  sense  of  divine 
and  avenging  justice,  have  taken  deeper  root  in  the  heart  of 
man,  than  that  they  can  by  any  means  be  eradicated. 

There  were  four  kinds  of  sacrifices  among  the  Gentiles. 
First,  the  propitiatory  or  peace-making  sacrifices  ;  for  by 
those,  they  thought  they  could  render  the  gods  propitious, 
or  appease  them;  or  avert  the  anger  of  the  gods,  and  obtain 
peace  with  them:  hence  these  verses  on  that  undertaking  of 
the  Greeks  in  the  exordium  of  Homer. 

But  let  some  prophet,  or  some  sacred  sage, 

Explore  the  cause  of  great  Apollo's  rage : 

Or  learn  the  wasteful  vengeance  to  remove 

By  mystic  dreams  ;  for  dreams  descend  from  Jove. 

If  broken  vows  this  heavy  curse  Lave  laid. 

Let  altars  smoke,  and  hecatombs  be  paid  : 

So  heaven  atoned  shall  dying  Greece  restore. 

And  Phffibus  dart  his  burning  shafts  no  more.— Pope's  Homer. 

They  were  desirous  of  appeasing  Apollo  by  sacrifices, 
who  had  inflicted  on  them  a  lamentable  mortality.  To  the 
same  purpose  is  that  passage  of  Virgil, 

The  prophet''  first  with  sacrifice  adores 

The  greater  gods;  their  pardon  then  implores,  &c, — Dryden's  Virg. 

^  Viz.  Helenus,  yEneid,  book  3. 
VOL.    IX.  2    c 


378        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

Hence  too  that  lamentation  of  the  person  in  the  Penalus  of 
Plautus,  who  could  not  make  satisfaction  to  his  gods. 

'  Unhappy  man  that  I  am,'  says  he,  '  to-day  I  have  sa- 
crificed six  lambs  to  my  much-incensed  gods,  and  yet  I  have 
not  been  able  to  render  Venus  propitious  to  me :  and  as  I 
could  not  appease  her,  I  came  instantly  off.' 

And  Suetonius,  speaking  of  Otho,  says,  'he  endea- 
vours, by  all  kinds  of  piaculary  sacrifices,  to  propitiate  the 
manes  of  Galba,  by  whom  he  had  seen  himself  thrust  down 
and  expelled.'  And  the  same  author  affirms  of  Nero,  *  that 
he  had  been  instructed  that  kings  were  wont  to  expiate  the 
heavenly  prodigies  by  the  slaughter  of  some  illustrious  vic- 
tim, and  to  turn  them  from  themselves  upon  the  heads  of 
their  nobles.'  Though  this  perhaps  rather  belongs  to  the 
second  kind.  But  innumerable  expressions  to  this  purpose 
are  extant,  both  among  the  Greek  and  Latin  authors. 

The  second  kind  were  the  expiatory  or  purifying  sacri- 
fices, by  which  sins  were  said  to  be  atoned,  expiated,  and 
cleansed,  and  sinners  purified,  purged,. and  made  desirous 
of  peace,  and  the  anger  of  the  gods  turned  aside  and  averted. 
It  would  be  tedious,  and  perhaps  superfluous,  to  produce 
examples  :  the  learned  can  easily  trace  them  in  great  abun- 
dance. The  other  kinds  were  the  eucharistical  and  pro- 
phetical, which  have  no  relation  to  our  present  purpose. 

In  this  way  of  appeasing  the  Deity,  mankind,  I  say, 
formerly  agreed  :  whence  it  is  evident,  that  an  innate  con- 
ception of  this  sin-avenging  justice  is  natural  to  all ;  and, 
therefore,  that  that  justice  is  to  be  reckoned  among  the  es- 
sential attributes  of  the  divine  nature,  concerning  which 
only,  and  not  concerning  the  free  acts  of  his  will,  mankind 
universally  agree. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         379 


CHAP.  IV. 

The  origin  of  human  sacrifices.  Their  use  among  the  Jews,  Assyrians, 
Germans,  Goths,  the  inluihitants  of  Marseilles,  the  Normans,  the  Francs, 
the  Tyrians,  the  Egyptians,  and  the  ancient  Gauls.  Testimonies  of  Ci- 
eero  and  Ccesar,  that  they  were  used  among  the  Britons  and  Romans  by 
the  Druids.  A  fiction  of  Appio  concerning  the  worship  in  the  temple  oj 
Jerusalem.  The  names  of  some  persons  sacrificed.  The  use  cf  human 
sacrifices  among  the  Gentiles,  proved  from  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  Dio~ 
nysius  of  Halicarnassia,  Porphyry,  Philo,  Eusebius,  Tertidlian,  Euripi- 
des. Instances  of  human  sacrifices  in  the  sacred  Scriptures.  The  re- 
markable obedience  of  Abraham.  What  the  neighbouring  nations  might 
have  gatliered  from  that  event.  Why  human  sacrifices  were  not  instituted 
by  God.  The  story  of  Iphigenia.  The  history  of  Jephtha.  Whether 
he  put  his  daughter  to  death.  The  cause  of  the  difficulty.  The  impious 
sacrifice  of  the  king  ofMoab.  The  abominable  superstition  of  the  Rugiani. 
The  craftiness  of  the  devil.  Vindications  of  the  argument.  The  same 
concluded. 

But  it  is  strange  to  think  what  a  stir  was  made,  by  the  an- 
cient enemy  of  mankind,  to  prevent  any  ray  of  light  respect- 
ing the  true  sacrifice,  that  was  to  be  made  in  the  fuhiess  of 
time,  from  being  communicated  to  the  minds  of  men  through 
means  of  this  universal  ceremony  and  custom  of  sacrificing. 
Hence,  he  influenced  the  most  of  the  nations  to  the  heinous, 
horrible,  and  detestable  crime  of  offering  human  sacrifices, 
in  order  to  make  atonement  for  themselves,  and  render  God 
propitious  by  such  an  abominable  wickedness. 

But  as  it  seems  probable,  that  some  light  may  be  bor- 
rowed from  the  consideration  of  these  sacrifices,  in  which, 
mankind,  from  the  presumption  of  a  future  judgment,  have 
so  closely  agreed,  perhaps  the  learned  reader  will  think  it 
not  foreign  to  our  purpose  to  dwell  a  little  on  the  subject, 
and  to  reckon  up  some  examples.  This  abomination,  pro- 
hibited by  God,  under  the  penalty  of  a  total  extermination, 
was  divers  times  committed  by  the  Jews,  running  headlong 
into  forbidden  wickedness,  while  urged  on  by  the  stings  of 
conscience  to  this  infernal  remedy.  They  offered  their 
children  as  burnt-sacrifices  to  Moloch,  that  is,  to  the  Sa- 
turn of  the  Tyrians  ;  not  to  the  planet  of  that  name  ;  not  to 
the  Father  of  the  Cretan  Jupiter  ;  but  to  the  Saturn  of  the 
Tyrians,  that  is,  to  Baal,  or  to  the  sun ;  and  not  by  making 

2  c  2 


380         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

them  to  pass  between  two  fires  for  purification,  as  some 
think,  but  by  burning  them  in  the  manner  of  a  whole  burnt- 
offering.  Psal,  cvi.  36 — 38.  *  And  they  served  their  idols 
which  were  a  snare  unto  them  :  yea,  they  sacrificed  their 
sons  and  their  daughters  unto  devils,  and  shed  innocent 
blood,  even  the  blood  of  their  sons  and  of  their  daughters, 
whom  they  sacrificed  unto  the  idols  of  Canaan,  and  the  land 
was  polluted  with  blood.'  Almost  the  whole  world,  during 
the  times  of  that  ignorance  which  God  winked  at,  paid 
court  to  the  devil.  Since  then,  it  is  abundantly  evident, 
from  these  sacrifices,  by  what  a  sense  of  vindicatory  justice, 
horror  of  punishment,  and  consciousness  of  sin,  mankind 
are  constrained :  we  must  enlarge  a  little  on  the  considera- 
tion of  them. 

Tacitus  speaking  of  the  Germans,  says,  'Of  the  gods, 
they  chiefly  worship  Mercury,  to  whom,  on  certain  days, 
they  hold  it  as  an  article  of  religion  and  piety  to  sacrifice 
human  victims :  Mars,  they  have  always  been  accustomed 
to  appease  by  a  most  cruel  worship ;  for  his  victims  were 
the  deaths  of  the  captives.'  Jornandes  aflSrms  the  same  of 
the  Goths.  And  thus  Lucan  writes  in  his  siege  of  Mar- 
seilles ; 

' Here  the  sacred  rites  of  the  gods  are  barbarous 

in  their  manner;  altars  are  built  for  deadly  ceremonies,  and 
every  tree  is  purified  by  human  blood.' 

And  the  same  author,  in  the  sixth  book,  from  his  Pre- 
cepts of  Magic,  has  these  verses. 

Vulnere  si  ventvis,  &c. 

'  If  contrary  to  nature,  the  child  be  extracted  through  a 
wound  in  the  belly,  to  be  served  up  on  the  hot  altars.' 

Virgil  bears  witness  that  such  sacrifices  were  offered  to 
Phoebus  or  the  Sun. — ^neid  x. 

Next  Lycas  fell ;  who  not  like  others  born. 

Was  from  his  wretched  mother  ripp'd  and  torn  : 

Sacred,  O  Phoebus!  from  his  birth  to  thee. — Dryden's  Virgil. 

But  Acosta  asserts,  that  infants  are  sacrificed,  even  at 
this  very  time,  to  the  Sun,  in  Cuscum,  the  capital  of  Peru. 

And  thus  the  Scriptures  testify,  2  Kings  xvii.  29 — 31. 

'Howbeit,  every  nation  made  gods  of  their  own,  and  put 
them  in  the  houses  of  the  high  places,  which  the  Samaritans 
|iad  made,  every  nation  in  their  cities  wherein  they  dwelt.  And 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  38i 

the  men  of  Babylon  made  Succoth-benoth,  and  the  men  of 
Cuth  made  Nergal,  and  the  men  of  Hamath  made  Ashima ; 
and  the  Avites  made  Nibhazand  Tartak,  and  the  Sepharvites 
burnt  their  children  in  fire  to  Adrammelech  and  Anammelech 
the  gods  of  Sepharvaim.' 

Ditmarus,  in  his  first  book,  testifies,  '  that  the  Normans 
and  Danes  sacrificed  yearly,  in  the  month  of  January,  to 
their  gods,  ninety-nine  human  creatures,  as  many  horses,  be- 
sides dogs  and  cocks.'  But  what  Procopius,  on  the  Gothic 
war  writes,  is  truly  astonishing,  viz.  *  that  the  Francs  made 
use  of  human  victims  in  his  time,  even  though  they  then 
worshipped  Christ.'  Alas!  for  such  a  kind  of  Christianity. 
The  practices  of  the  Tyrians,^  Carthaginians,  and  Egyptians, 
in  this  respect,  are  known  to  every  one.  And  Theodoret 
says,  'that  in  Rhodes,  some  person  was  sacrificed  to  Saturn, 
on  the  sixteenth  of  the  calends  of  November,  which,  after 
having  been  for  a  long  time  observed,  became  a  custom. 
And  they  used  to  reserve  one  of  those  who  had  been  capi- 
tally condemned  till  the  feast  of  Saturn.' 

Porphyry,  *  on  Abstinence  from  Animals,'  relates  the 
customs  of  the  Phoenicians  concerning  this  matter.  '  The 
Phoenicians,'  says  he,  '  in  great  disasters,  either  by  wars,  or 
commotions,  or  pestilence,  used  to  sacrifice  one  of  their 
dearest  friends,  or  relations,  to  Saturn,  devoted  to  this  fate 
by  the  common  suffrages.'  They  were  called  Phoenicians, 
from  the  word  <poivi^,  which  signifies  a  red  colour ;  cjioTvi^, 
according  to  Eustathius,  is  from  ^ovoc,  which  signifies 
blood ;  thence  the  colour  called  (^oivlKog,  or  the  purple  co- 
lour. Hence,  the  learned  conjecture,  that  the  Phoenicians 
were  the  descendants  of  Esau  or  Edom,  whose  name  also 
signifies  red,  and  from  whom  also  the  Red  Sea  was  named. 
Edom,  then  (polviE,  and  IpvOpaiog,  mean  the  same,  viz.  red. 
Why  may  we  not  then  conjecture,  that  the  Phoenicians  or 
Idumeeans,  were  first  led  to  this  custom,  from  some  corrupt 
tradition  concerning  the  sacrificing  of  Isaac,  the  father  of 
Esau,  the  leader  and  head  of  their  nation.  This,  at  least, 
makes  for  the  conjecture,  that  while  other  nations  sacrificed 
enemies  or  strangers.  Porphyry  bears  witness  that  they  sa- 
crificed one  of  their  dearest  friends  or  relations.     But  Isaac 

a  Concerning  the  Tyrians,  see  Curtius,  book  fourlli ;  and  concerning  (he  Carlha- 
ginians,  see  Diodorus,  book  twentieth. 


382         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

was  not  to  Abraham  one  of  the  dearest,  but  the  only  dear 
one.  From  such  corrupt  traditions  as  these,  it  is  not  to  be 
wondered,  that  the  consciences  of  men,  struck  with  a  fear  of 
punishment,  should  have  been  encouraged  to  persevere  in  so 
cruel  and  superstitious  a  worship. 

Concerning  the  ancient  Gauls,  we  have  the  most  credi- 
table evidences,  Cicero,  and  Julius  Caesar ;  the  former  of 
whom  charges  them  with  the  practice  of  offering  human  sa- 
crifices, as  a  horrid  crime,  and  certain  evidence  of  their  con- 
tempt of  Deity.  The  other,  however,  commends  them  on 
this  very  account,  on  the  score  of  a  more  severe  religion. 
'If  at  any  time  induced  by  fear,  they  think  it  necessary  that 
the  gods  should  be  appeased,  they  defile  their  altars  and 
temples  with  human  victims  ;  as  if  they  could  not  practice 
religion,  without  first  violating  it  by  their  wickedness.  For 
who  does  not  know,  that  even  at  this  day,  they  retain  that 
savage  and  barbarous  custom  of  sacrificing  human  beings ; 
thinking  that  the  immortal  gods  can  be  appeased  by  the 
blood  and  wickedness  of  man,'  Cicero  pro  Fonteio.  But 
Csesar,  the  conqueror  of  the  Gauls,  gives  us  a  very  different 
account  of  these  kind  of  sacrifices  ;  '  this  nation,'  says  he, 
*  of  all  the  Gauls,  is  most  devoted  to  religious  observances  ; 
and  for  that  reason,  those  who  labour  under  any  grievous 
distemper,  or  who  are  conversant  in  dangers  and  battles, 
either  sacrifice  human  victims,  or  vow  that  they  will  sacri- 
fice them,  and  they  employ  the  Druids  as  the  conductors  of 
such  sacrifices  ;  for  they  have  an  opinion  that,  unless  a  hu- 
man life  be  given  for  a  human  life,  the  heavenly  deities  can- 
not be  appeased.'  These  last  words  seem  to  me  to  acknow- 
ledge a  persuasion  that  must  have  arisen  from  some  ancient 
tradition  about  the  substitution  of  the  Son  of  Man,  in  the 
stead  of  sinners,  as  a  propitiation  for  sin. 

No  doubt  can  be  entertained  concerning  the  inhabitants 
of  Britain,  but  that  they  were  guilty  of  the  same  practices ; 
for  from  them  came  the  Druids,  the  first  promoters  of  that 
superstition,  not  only  in  the  Gauls,  but  even  in  Italy,  and  in 
the  city  of  Rome  itself.  '  The  doctrine  of  the  Druids,'  says 
Caesar,  'is  thought  to  have  been  found  in  Britain,  and 
brought  thence  into  Gaul :  and  now  such  as  are  desirous  to 
examine  more  particularly  into  that  matter,  generally  go 
thither  for  the  sake  of  information.'     Book  vi.  of  the  wars 


A    DISSERTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         383 

in  Gaul.  But  Tacitus  informs  us  with  what  kind  of  sacri- 
fices they  performed  their  divine  services  there,  in  the  four- 
teenth book  of  his  annals.  *  When  the  island  of  Anglesea 
was  conquered  by  Paulinus,  a  guard,'  says  he,  '  was  placed 
over  the  vanquished,  and  the  groves  devoted  to  cruel  super- 
stitions were  hewn  down  (the  same  was  done  by  Cfesar  in 
the  siege  of  Marseilles;  Lucan,  book  third);  for  it  was  an 
article  of  their  religion  to  sacrifice  their  captives  on  the 
altars,  and  to  consult  their  gods  by  human  entrails.' 
Hence  that  verse  in  Horace. 

VJsam  Britannos  hospitibus  feros. 

I  will  visit  the  Britons  cruel  to  strangers. 

At  which  remote  place,''  the  Britons  used  to  sacrifice  their 
guests  for  victims ;  yea,  even  in  Rome  itself,  as  Plutarch, 
in  his  life  of  Marcellus  testifies,  they  buried,  by  order  of  the 
higli-priests,  '  a  man  and  woman  of  Gaul,  and  a  man  and 
woman  of  Greece,'  alive  in  the  cattle  market,  to  avert  some 
calamity  by  such  a  fatal  sacrifice.  Whether  this  was  done 
yearly,  as  some  think,  I  am  rather  inclined  to  doubt. 

Of  the  same  kind  was  the  religion  of  the  Decii,  devoting 
themselves  for  the  safety  of  the  city.  Hence  a  suspicion 
arose,  and  was  every  where  rumoured  among  the  Gentiles 
concerning  the  sacred  rites  of  the  Jews,  with  which  they 
were  unacquainted,  viz.  that  they  were  wont  to  be  solem- 
nized with  human  sacrifices.  For  although  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  temple,  it  was  manifest  that  they  worshipped  the 
God  of  heaven  only,  yet  so  long  as  they  celebrated  the  se- 
cret mysteries  appointed  them  by  God,  Josephus  against 
Appio  bears  witness,  that  they  laboured  under  the  infamy  of 
that  horrible  crime,  viz.  of  sacrificing  human  victims,  among 
those  who  were  unacquainted  with  the  Jewish  polity  ;  where 
he  also  recites,  from  the  same  Appio,  a  most  ridiculous  fic- 
tion about  a  young  Greek  captive,  being  delivered  by  An- 
tiochus,*when  he  impiously  spoiled  the  temple,  after  having 
been  fed  there  on  a  sumptuous  diet  for  the  space  of  a  year, 
that  he  might  make  the  fatter  a  victim. 

A  custom  that  prevailed  with  some,  not  unlike  this  un- 
truth about  the  young  Greek  kept  in  the  temple,  seems  to 
have  given  rise  to  it.  For  thus  Diodorus,  in  book  v.  writes 
of  the  Druids,  '  They  fix  up  their  malefactors  upon  poles, 

•>  Viz,  Anglesea. 


384         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

after  having  kept  them  five  years  (it  seems  they  fattened 
much  slower  than  at  Jerusalem),  and  sacrifice  them  to  their 
gods  ;  and  with  other  first-fruits  of  the  year,  offer  them  on 
large  funeral  piles.'  Theodoretalso  mentions  something  of 
that  kind  concerning  the  Rhodians,  in  the  first  book  '  of  the 
Greek  Affections  ;'  the  words  have  been  mentioned  before. 
But  that  young  Greek,  destined  for  sacrifice,  in  Appio, 
has  no  name  ;  that  is,  there  never  was  any  such  person. 

But,  friend,  discover  faithful  what  I  crave, 
Artful  concealment  ill  becomes  the  brave  ; 
Say  what  thy  birth,  and  what  the  name  you  bore, 
Imposed  by  parents  in  the  natal  hour.-  - 

Pope's*^  Homer's  Odyssey,  book  viii. 

But  after  having  prepared  the  plot,  he  ought  not  to  have 
shunned  the  task  of  giving  names  to  the  actors.  We  have 
the  name  of  a  Persian  sacrificed  even  among  the  Thracians, 
in  Herodotus,  book  ix.  'The  Thracians  of  Apsinthium,' 
says  he,  *  having  seized  Oiobazus  flying  into  Thrace,  sacri- 
ficed him  after  their  custom  to  Pleistorus,  the  god  of  the 
country.' 

There  is  still  remaining,  if  I  rightly  remember,  the  name 
of  a  Spanish  soldier,  a  captive  with  other  of  his  companions 
among  the  Mexicans,  well  known  inhabitants  of  America, 
who  being  sacrificed  on  a  very  high  altar  to  the  gods  of  the 
country,  when  his  heart  was  pulled  out,  if  we  can  credit 
Peter  Martyr,  author  of  the  History  of  the  West  Indies, 
tumbling  down  upon  the  sand,  exclaimed,  *  O  companions, 
they  have  murdered  me.'  Clemens  of  Alexandria  makes 
mention  of  Theopompus,  a  king  of  the  Lacedemonians,  be- 
ing sacrificed  by  Aristomenes  the  Messenian.  His  words, 
which  elegantly  set  forth  this  custom  of  all  the  nations,  we 
shall  beg  leave  to  trouble  the  reader  with  :  '  But  now,  when 
they  had  invaded  all  states  and  nations  as  plagues  (he  is 
speaking  of  dcemons)  they  demanded  cruel  sacrifices  ;  and 
one  Aristomenes,  a  Messenian,  slew  three  hundre'd  in  ho- 
nour of  Ithometan  Jupiter,  thinking  that  he  sacrificed  so 
many  hecatombs  in  due  form,  and  of  such  a  kind.  Among 
these,  too,  was  Theopompus,  king  of  the  Lacedemonians,  an 
illustrious  victim.  But  the  inhabitants  of  Mount  Taurus, 
who  dwell  about  the  Tauric  Chersonese,  instantly  sacrifice 

=  The  words   in  the  original  apply  much  better  to  our  author's  meaning.     See 
them,  Odyss.  lib.  viii.  v.  550. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE        385 

whatever  shipwrecked  strangers  they  find  upon  their  coasts 
to  Diana  of  Taurus.'  '  Thence,  ye  inhospitable  shores,  Eu- 
ripides again  and  again  bewails  in  his  scenes  these  your  sa- 
crifices.'— Clemens's  Exhortations  to  the  Greeks. 

But  what  he  says  concerning  Euripides,  has  a  reference 
to  the  story  of  Iphigenia  among  the  inhabitants  of  Taurus  :^ 
where,  however,  the  poet  signifies  that  she  detested  such 
kinds  of  sacrifices ;  for  he  introduces  Iphigenia,  thep. 
priestess  of  Diana,  thus  bewailing  her  lot : 

'They  have  appointed  me  priestess  in  these  temples, 
where  Diana,  the  goddess  of  the  festival,  is  delighted  with 
such  laws ;  whose  name  alone  is  honourable  :  but  I  say  no 
more,  dreading  the  goddess.  For  I  sacrifice  (and  it  long 
hath  been  a  custom  of  the  state),  every  Grecian  that  arrives 
in  this  country.' — Eur.  Iph.  in  Tauris. 

Thus  far  Clemens,  who  also  demonstrates  the  same  thing 
of  the  Thessalians,  Lycians,  Lesbians,  Phocensians,  and 
Romans,  from  Monimus,  Antoclides,  Pythocles,  and  Dema- 
ratus.  That  deed  too  of  Agamemnon,  alluded  to  by  Virgil, 
furnishes  another  proof. 

Sanguine  placastis  ventos,  et  virgine  caesa,  &c. 

O,  Grecians,  wlien  tiie  Trojan  shores  you  sought, 
Your  passage  with  a  virgin's  blood  was  bought. 

Dryden's  Virg. 

Tertullian  also  bears  witness  to  this  wickedness  :  *  In 
Africa  they  openly  sacrificed  infants  to  Saturn,  even  down 
to  the  time  of  the  proconsulate  of  Tiberius  ;  and  what  is 
surprising,  even  in  that  most  religious  city  of  the  pious  de- 
scendants of  vEneas,  there  is  a  certain  Jupiter,  whom,  at  his 
games,  they  drench  with  human  blood.' 

It  is  notoriously  known,  that  in  the  sanguinary  games  of 
the  Romans,  they  made  atonement  to  the  gods  with  human 
blood,  namely,  that  of  captives.  But  Eusebius*  Pamphilus 
enters  the  most  fully  of  any  into  this  matter:  for  he  shews 
from  Porphyry,  Philo,  Clemens,  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassia, 
and  Diodorus  Siculus,  that  this  ceremony  of  offering  human 
sacrifices  was  practised  all  over  the  world.  Porphyry,  in- 
deed, shews,  at  large,  who   instituted  this  kind  of  worship 

^  In  the  play  of  Euripides,  called  Iphigenia  in  Tauris. 

e  Bishop  of  Caesarea,  in  Palestine,  a  very  learned  prelate,  and  one  of  the 
greatest  writers  of  his  time. 


386        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

in  different  places,  and  who  put  an  end  to  it.  Another  very 
ingenious  poet  brings  an  accusation  of  extreme  folly  and 
madness,  against  this  rite,  in  these  verses.  It  is  a  Plebeian 
addressing  Agamemnon : 

Tu  quurn  pro  vitula,  statuis  dulcem  Aullde  natam, 
Ante  aras,  spargisque  raola  caput,  Iniprobe,  Salsa, 
Rectum  aninii  servas  1 

When  your  own  child  you  to  the  altar  led. 
And  pour'd  the  salted  meal  upon  her  head  ; 
When  you  beheld  the  lovely  victim  slain,  ^ 
Unnatural  Father  !  were  you  sound  of  brain  ? 

Agamemnon  is  introduced  thus  apologizing  for  himself, 
on  account  of  the  utility  and  necessity  of  the  sacrifice. 

VeruiTi  ego,  ut  haerentes  adverso  littore  naves 
Eriperem,  prudens  placavi  sanguine  Divos. 

But  I,  wliile  adverse  winds  tempestuous  roar. 
To  loose  our  fated  navy  from  the  shore. 
Wisely  with  blood  the  powers  divine  adore. 

Francis's  Horace. 

The  Plebeian  again  charges  him  with  madness  : 

Nempe  tuo,  furiose  ? 
What!  your  own  blood,  you  madman? 

But  Philo,  in  his  first  book,  relates  that  one  Saturn 
(there  were  many  illustrious  persons  of  that  name,  as  well 
as  of  the  name  of  Hercules),  when  the  enemies  of  his  country 
were  oppressing  it,  sacrificed  at  the  altars  his  own  daughter 
named  Leudem,  which  among  them,  viz.  the  Tyrians,  means 
only-begotten. 

I  have  little  or  no  doubt  but  that  this  Saturn  was  Jeph- 
thah  the  Israelite  ;  that  their  Hercules  was  Joshua,  the  ce- 
lebrated Vossius  has  clearly  proved.    Book  i.  of  Idol. 

But  as  we  have  made  mention  of  Jephthah,  it  will  not  be 
foreign  to  our  purpose,  briefly  to  treat  of  these  three  famous 
examples  of  human  sacrifices  recorded  in  the  sacred  writings. 
The  first  is  contained  in  that  celebrated  history  concerning 
the  trial  of  Abraham :  an  undertaking  so  wonderful  and 
astonishing,  that  no  age  hath  ever  produced,  or  will  pro- 
duce its  like.  It  even  exceeds  every  thing  that  fabulous 
Greece  hath  presumed  in  story.     A  most  indulgent  and  af- 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        387 

fectionate  father,  weighed  down  with  age/  is  ordered  to 
oflPer  his  only  son,  the  pillar  of  his  house  and  family,  the 
trust  of  heaven,  a  son  solemnly  promised  him  by  God,  the 
foundation  of  the  future  church,  in  whom,  according  to  the 
oracles  of  God,  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be 
blessed ;  this  most  innocent,  and  most  obedient  son,  he  is 
ordered  to  offer  as  a  burnt-offering :  a  dreadful  kind  of  sacri- 
fice indeed  !  which  required,  that  the  victim  should  be  first 
slain,  afterward  cut  in  pieces,  and  lastly  burnt  by  the  hand 
of  a  father !  What  though  the  purpose  was  not  accom- 
plished, God  having  graciously  so  ordained  it ;  this  obe- 
dience of  the  holy  man  is,  notwithstanding,  to  be  had  in 
everlasting  remembrance  !  And  forasmuch  as  he  begun  the 
task  with  a  sincere  heart  and  unfeigned  faith,  the  Holy 
Spirit  bears  testimony  to  him,  as  if  he  had  really  offered  his 
son.  Heb.  xi.  17.  '  By  faith  Abraham,  when  he  was  tried, 
offered  up  Isaac  :  and  he  that  had  received  the  promises, 
offered  up  his  only-begotten.'  The  fame  of  this  transaction, 
no  doubt,  was  spread,  in  ancient  times,  over  many  of  the 
Eastern  nations.  But  that  those,  who  were  altosethe  riono- 
rant  of  the  communion  and  friendship  which  Abraham  cul- 
tivated with  the  Lord,  and  yet  were  convinced  in  their  con- 
sciences, that  a  more  noble  sacrifice  than  all  cattle,  and  a 
more  precious  victim  was  necessary  to  be  offered  to  God 
(for  if  this  persuasion  had  not  been  deeply  impressed  on 
their  minds,  the  devil  could  not  have  induced  them  to  that 
dreadful  worship),  assumed  the  courage  of  practising  the 
same  thing,  from  that  event,  there  is  not  any  room  to  doubt. 
And  farther,  if  any  report  were  spread  abroad  concerning 
the  divine  command  and  oracle  which  Abraham  received, 
the  eyes  of  all  would  be  turned  upon  him  as  the  wisest  and 
holiest  of  men,  and  they  would  be  led,  perhaps,  to  conclude 
falsely  that  God  might  be  propitiated  by  such  kind  of  vic- 
tims. For  they  did  not  this,  from  any  rivalship  of  Abraham, 
whom  they  respected  as  a  wise  and  just  man  ;  but  being  de- 
ceived by  that  action  of  his,  and  endeavouring  at  an  expi- 
ation of  their  own  crimes,  they  did  the  same  thing  that  he 

f  Abraham  is  now  said  to  have  been  a  hundred  and  thirty-three  years  of  age:  for 
some  are  of  opinion  that  Isaac,  at  the  time  he  was  to  have  been  sacrificed,  was  thirty- 
three  years  old  :  Josephus  says,  twenty-five.  The  Jews  in  Seder  Olam,  thirty-six. 
Nor  is  it  any  objection  that  he  is  called  Naar,  for  so  Benjamin,  the  father  of  many 
children  is  called.  Gen.  xliii. 


388         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

did,  but  with  a  very  different  end  :  for  the  offering  up  of  Isaac 
was  a  type  of  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus  Christ. 

But  from  that  right  and  dominion,  which  God  naturally 
hath  over  all  the  creatures,  or  from  that  superior  excellence 
and  eminence,  wherewith  he  is  endowed  and  constituted,  he 
might,  without  any  degree  or  suspicion  of  injustice  or  cruelty, 
exact  victims  as  a  tribute  from  man  ;  but  he  hath  declared 
his  will  to  the  contrary  ;  Exod.  xxxiv.  19,  20.  '  But  the 
firstlings  of  an  ass  thou  shalt  redeem  with  a  lamb  :  and  the 
first  born  of  thy  sons  thou  shalt  redeem.'  Partly,  lest 
human  blood,  of  which  he  has  the  highest  care,  should  be- 
come of  little  account;  but  especially,  because  all  mankind 
in  general  being  polluted  with  iniquities,  a  type  of  his  im- 
maculate son  could  not  be  taken  from  among  them. 

But  this  history,  the  falsifying  poets  of  the  Greeks  have 
corrupted,  by  that  fable  of  theirs,  concerning  the  sacrifice  of 
Iphigenia,  begun  by  her  father  Agamemnon,  but  who  was 
liberated  by  the  substitution  of  a  doe  :s  hence,  in  Euripides, 
these  words  are  falsely  applied  to  the  virgin,  destined  to  be 
sacrificed,  which  (the  proper  changes  being  made),  might 
with  more  propriety  be  spoken  of  Isaac,  when  acting  in 
obedience  to  the  command  of  God,  and  of  his  father. 

— — —  a)  waTEf  'TTa^liy.i  troi,  &C.  &C. 


'  O,  father,  I  am  here  present,  and  I  cheerfully  deliver  up 
my  body,  for  my  country,  and  for  all  Greece,  to  be  sacrificed 
at  the  altar  of  the  goddess,  by  those  who  now  conduct  me 
thither,  if  the  oracle  so  require.' — Euripid.  Iphigenia  in 
Aulis,  near  the  end. 

It  is  worth  while  to  notice,  by  the  way,  the  use  of  the 
word  virlp ;  the  virgin  to  be  sacrificed,  declared,  that  she 
was  willing  to  appease  the  anger  of  the  gods,  and  suffer  pu- 
nishment in  behalf  of,  or,  instead  of  her  country  and  all 
Greece  :  and  but  a  little  before  she  is  introduced,  exulting 
in  these  words, 

EXis-itet'  a|t*<f>i-vaov,  &c. 

'  Invoke  to  her  temple,  to  her  altar,  Diana,  queen  Diana, 

g  Agamemnon,  as  the  story  runs,  had  killed  one  of  Diana's  stags  ;  and  the  god- 
dess would  be  appeased  on  no  other  terms  than  by  the  sacrifice  of  his  daughter  : 
but  after  she  was  laid  on  the  pile,  Diana,  pitying  the  virgin,  put  a  doe  in  her  room, 
and  made  Iphigenia  her  priestess. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       389 

the  blessed  Diana:  for  if  it  shall  be  necessary,  by  my  blood 
and  sacrifice  I  will  obliterate  the  oracle.' 

Justly  celebrated  too,  in  the  second  place,  is  the  history 
of  Jephthah's  sacrificing  his  only  daughter,  related  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  in  these  words.  Judges  xi.  30,  31.  '  And  Jeph- 
thah  vowed  a  vow  unto  the  Lord,  and  said,  If  thou  shalt 
without  fail  deliver  the  children  of  Ammon  into  mine  hands ; 
then  it  shall  be,  that  whatsoever  cometh  forth  of  the  doors 
of  my  house  to  meet  me,  when  I  return  in  peace  from  the 
children  of  Ammon,  shall  surely  be  the  Lord's,  and  I  will 
offer  it  up  for  a  burnt-offering.'  But  when  he  returned,  'his 
daughter  came  out  to  meet  him  ;  and  at  the  end  of  two 
months,  he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow.'  If  any  pas- 
sage ever  puzzled  both  Jewish  and  Christian  interpreters, 
ancient  and  modern,  as  well  as  all  your  disputants  upon, 
and  patchers  up  of  common- place  difficulties,  this  one  has. 
For  on  the  one  hand,  here  it  is  supposed,  that  all  offering  of 
human  sacrifices  is  detested  and  abhorred  by  God;  and  to 
ascribe  such  a  thing  to  a  man  of  piety,  and  one  celebrated 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  for  his  faith,  many  will  not  venture.  But 
again,  on  the  other  hand,  the  words  of  the  history,  the  cir- 
cumstances, the  grief  and  lamentation  of  the  father,  seem 
hardly  capable  of  admitting  any  other  meaning.  But  to  me 
these  things  are  ambiguous.*' 

First,  It  is  evident,  that  a  gross  ignorance  of  the  law, 
either  in  making  the  vow,  or  in  executing  it,  is  by  no  means 
to  be  ascribed  to  Jephthah,  who  was,  though  a  military  man, 
a  man  of  piety,  a  fearer  of  God,  and  well  acquainted  with 
the  sacred  writings.  Now  then,  if  he  simply  made  a  vow  • 
that  a  compensation  and  redemption,  accordino-  to  the  valua- 
tion of  the  priests,  ought  to  have  been  made,  could  not  have 
escaped  him  ;  and  therefore  there  was  no  reason  why  he 
should  so  much  bewail  the  event  of  a  vow,  by  which  he  had 
engaged  himself  to  the  Lord,  and  to  which  he  was  bound  : 
for  he  might  both  keep  his  faith,  and  free  his  daughter,  ac- 
cording to  the  words  of  the  law  ;  Lev.  xxvii.  2L  31. 

Or  if  we  should  conjecture,  that  he  was  so  o-rossly  mis- 
taken, and  entirely  unacquainted  with  divine  matters,  was 
there  no  priest  or  scribe  among  all  the  people,  who,  during 

•>  That  is,  the  expressions  relating  to  this  subject  are  capable  of  more  meanings 
than  one  ;  and  to  ascertain  the  right  one,  is  attended  with  difficulties. 


390        A     DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

that  time  which  he  granted  to  his  daughter,  at  her  own  re- 
quest, to  bewail  her  virginity,  could  instruct  this  illustrious 
leader,  who  had  lately  merited  so  highly  of  the  common- 
wealth, in  the  meaning  of  the  law,  so  that  he  should  neither 
vex  himself,  render  his  family  extinct,  nor  worship  God,  to 
no  purpose,  by  a  vain  superstition?  I  have  no  doubt  then, 
but  that  Jephthah  performed  his  duty  in  executing  his  vow, 
according  to  the  precept  of  the  law,  however  much  he  might 
have  erred  in  his  original  conception  of  it. 

Nor  is  it  less  doubtful,  in  the  second  place,  that  Jeph- 
thah did  not  offer  his  daughter  as  a  burnt-offering,  as  the 
words  of  the  vow  imply,  according  to  the  ceremony  and  in- 
stitution of  that  kind  of  sacrifice:  for  as  these  sacrifices 
could  be  performed  by  the  priest  only,  by  killing  the  victim, 
cutting  it  in  pieces,  and  consuming  it  by  fire  upon  the  altar; 
offices,  in  which  no  priest  would  have  ministered  or  assisted: 
so  also,  such  kind  of  sacrifices  are  enumerated  among  the 
abominations  to  the  Lord  which  he  hateth  ;  Deut.  xii.  31. 
'Thou  shalt  not  do  so  unto  the  Lord  thy  God  ;  for  every 
abomination  to  the  Lord  which  he  hateth,  have  they  done 
unto  their  gods :  for  even  their  sons  and  their  daughters 
have  they  burnt  in  the  fire  to  their  gods.' 

Nor  does  it  seem  probable  that  Jephthah  had  dedicated 
his  daughter  to  God,  that  she  should  perpetually  remain  a 
virgin :  for  neither  hath  God  instituted  any  such  kind  of 
worship ;  nor  could  the  forced  virginity  of  the  daughter  by 
any  means  ever  be  reckoned  to  the  account  of  the  father,  as 
any  valuable  consideration,  in  place  of  a  victim. 

As  then  there  were  two  kinds  of  things  devoted  to  God  : 
the  first  of  which,  was  of  the  class'  of  those,  which,  as  God 
did  not  order  that  they  should  be  offered  in  sacrifice,  it  was 
made  a  statute,  that  they  should  be  valued  by  the  priest,  at 
a  fair  valuation,  and  be  redeemed,  and  so  return  again  to 
common  use.  The  law  of  these  is  delivered.  Lev.  xxvii.1,2. 
&,c.  *  And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  saying.  Speak  unto 
the  children  of  Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  when  a  man  shall 
make  a  singular  vow,  the  persons  shall  be  for  the  Lord,  by 
thy  estimation.  And  thy  estimation  shall  be,  of  the  male 
from  twenty  years  old,  even  unto  sixty  years  old,  even  thy 
estimation  shall  be  fifty  shekels  of  silver,  after  the  shekel  of 
the  sanctuary.     And  if  it  be  a  female,  then  thy  estimation 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE   JUSTICE.         391 

shall  be  thirty  shekels,'  &c.  And  ver.  8.  '  But  if  he  be 
poorer  than  thy  estimation,  then  he  shall  present  himself 
before  the  priest,  and  the  priest  shall  value  him :  according 
to  his  ability  that  vowed  shall  the  priest  value  him.' 

But  the  second  kind  of  these  were  called  Chccrem,^  con- 
cerning which  it  was  not  a  simple  vow,  of  which  there  was 
no  redemption  or  estimation  to  be  made  by  the  priest :  the 
law  respecting  these  is  given  in  the  28th  and  29th  verses 
of  the  same  chapter.  'Notwithstanding,  no  devoted  thing 
that  a  man  shall  devote  unto  the  Lord,  of  all  that  he  hath, 
both  of  man  and  beast,  and  of  the  field  of  his  possession 
shall  be  sold  or  redeemed  :  every  devoted  thing  is  most  holy 
unto  the  Lord.  None  devoted,  which  shall  be  devoted  of 
men,  shall  be  redeemed  ;  but  shall  surely  be  put  to  death.' 

The  question  to  which  of  these  two  kinds  the  vow  of 
Jephthah  belonged,  creates,  if  I  mistake  not,  the  whole  diffi- 
culty of  the  passage. 

That  it  belonged  not  to  the  first  is  as  clear  as  the  day ; 
because  if  we  suppose  that  it  did,  he  might  easily  have  ex- 
tricated himself  and  family  from  all  grief  on  that  account, 
by  paying  the  estimation  made  by  the  priest.  It  was  then  a 
Chfdrem  which,  by  his  vow,  Jephthah  had  vowed  to  the 
Lord,  by  no  means  to  be  redeemed,  but  accounted  *  most 
holy  unto  the  Lord;'  as  in  verses  27,  28.  before-mentioned. 

But  it  is  doubted,  whether  a  rational  creature  could  be 
made  a  Charem :  but  in  fact  there  can  hardly  remain  any 
room  for  doubt :  to  the  person  who  considers  the  text  itself, 
it  will  easily  appear :  the  words  are,  '  every  devoted  thing  is 
most  holy  unto  the  Lord  :  none  devoted,  which  shall  be  de- 
voted of  men,  shall  be  redeemed,  but  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death.'  It  is  evident  from  the  foregoing  verse,  that  the 
words  *  of  men,'  point  not  at  the  efficient  cause,  but  the 
matter""  of  the  vow  ;  where,  the  same  words,  in  the  original, 
cannot  be  otherwise  rendered  than  by '  of  or  '  touching  man,' 
or  by  *  out  of  or  *  from  among  mankind  or  men,'  or  *  of  the  class 
of  men.'  And  all  those  writers  interpret  the  words  in  this 
sense  (and  there  are  not  afewof  them  both  among  Jews  and 
Christians)  who  are  of  opinion,  that  the  passage  ought  to  be 

'  A  thing  or  person  so  devojed  as  not  to  be  redeemed, 
k  That  is,  pointing  not  at  the  persons  vowing,  but  at  the  object  of  their  vow,  or  at 
the  thing  vowed  or  devoted  by  them. 


392  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

explained  as  relating  to  the  enemies  of  God  devoted  to  uni- 
versal slaughter  and  destruction. 

As  Jephthah  then  had  devoted  his  daughter  as  a  Cliarem, 
it  seems  hardly  to  admit  of  a  doubt  that  the  cause  of  his 
consternation  and  sorrow  at  meeting  her  was,  because,  that 
according  to  the  law  he  had  slain  her,  having  devoted  her 
to  God  in  such  a  manner  as  not  to  be  redeemed. 

It  would  be  foreign  to  our  purpose  to  agitate  this  ques- 
tion any  farther.  We  shall  only  say,  then,  that  after  having 
maturely  weighed  all  the  circumstances  of  the  text,  and  of 
the  thing  itself,  according  to  the  measure  of  our  abilities, 
we  have  gone  into  the  opinion  of  those  who  maintain,  that 
Jephthah  gave  up  his  daughter  to  death,  she  being  devoted 
to  God  in  such  a  manner,  as  according  to  the  law  not  to  be 
redeemed,  that  Supreme  Being,  who  has  the  absolute  right 
and  power  of  life  and  death,  so  requiring'  it.  The  theolo- 
gians of  both  nations,"*  who  espouse  this  side  of  the  ques- 
tion, are  both  numerous  and  renowned.  Peter  Martyr  tes- 
tifies, that  almost  all  the  more  ancient  Rabbins  agreed  in  this 
opinion.  Josephus  in  his  Antiquities  follows  them,  although 
he  hath  not  determined  Jephthah  to  be  free  of  blame.  Of 
the  fathers,  it  is  sufficient,  for  the  matter  is  not  to  be  deter- 
mined by  votes,  that  Hieron  in  his  epistle  to  Julian  ;  Am- 
brose on  Virginity,  book  the  third;  Augustine  on  the  book 
of  Judges;  and  of  those  in  later  times,  Peter  Martyr  in  his 
commentary  on  the  1 1th  of  Judges  ;  and  Ludovicus  Capellus, 
in  that  excellent  treatise  of  his  concerning  Jephthah's  vow, 
have  either  approved,  or  at  least  have  not  dissented  from 
this  opinion.  What  Epiphanius"  relates  concerning  the 
deification  of  Jephthah's  daughter,  favours  this  opinion  :  'In 
Sebaste,'  says  he,  'which  was  formerly  called  Samaria,  hav- 
ino"  deified  the  daughter  of  Jephthah,  they  yearly  celebrate 
a  solemn  festival  in  honour  of  her,'  Yea,  more,  the  most 
learned  agree  that  the  fame  of  this  transaction  was  so  spread 
among  the  Gentile  nations,  that  thence  Homer,  Euripides, 
and  others,  seized  the  occasion  of  raising  that  fable  about 

'  The  author  here  uses  the  words, '  at  least  interpretatively ,'  before  '  so  requiring  it :' 
meaning  thereby,  as  I  understand  him,  tliat  tlie  just  and  proper  interpretation  of  the 
passage  wherein  this  history  is  recorded,  and  of  the  others  quoted,  relating  to  vows, 
had  clearly  determined  him  to  adopt  this  opinion. 

•»  That  is,  both  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  persuasion. 

"  Patriarch  of  Constantinople  in  the  year  520. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         393 

Agamemnon's  sacrificing  his  daughter;  and  that  there  never 
was  any  other  Iphigenia  than  Jephthegenia,  nor  Iphianassa° 
than  I^0tava(7<Ta,P  or  Jephtheauassa. 

But  this  was  a  kind  of  human  sacrifice,  by  which,  as  God 
intended  to  shadow  forth  the  true  sacrifice  of  his  Son;  so, 
the  enemy  of  the  human  race  aping  the  Almighty,  and  tak- 
ing advantage  of,  and  insulting  the  blindness,  of  mankind, 
and  the  horror  of  their  troubled  consciences  arising  from  a 
sense  of  the  guilt  of  sin,  influenced  and  compelled  them  to 
the  performance  of  ceremonies  of  a  similar  kind. 

There  is  no  need  that  we  should  dwell  on  the  third  in- 
stance of  this  kind  of  sacrifices  that  occurs  in  the  sacred 
writings  ;  viz.  that  of  the  king  of  Moab,  during  the  siege 
of  his  city,  offering  up  either  his  own  son,  or  the  king  of 
Edom's  upon  the  wall,  as  he  was  a  heathen  and  a  worship- 
per of  Satan,  according  to  the  custom  of  the  Phoenicians. 
Despairing  of  his  situation,  when  it  seemed  to  him  that  the 
city  could  no  longer  be  defended  ;  and  when  he  had  no  hope 
of  breaking  through,  or  of  escaping,  he  offered  his  own  son,  in 
my  opinion  (for  the  king  of  Edom  had  no  first-born  to  suc- 
ceed him  in  the  government,  being  himself  only  a  deputy 
king)  as  a  sacrifice  to  the  gods  of  his  country,  to  procure  a 
deliverance.  The  three  kings  then  departed  from  the  city 
which  they  were  besieging,  God  so  directing  it,  either  hav- 
ing entered  into  an  agreement  to  that  purpose,  or  because 
of  the  war  not  being  successfully  ended  (for  the  conjectures 
on  this  point  are  by  no  means  satisfactory),  some  indig- 
nation having  broke  out  among  the  troops  of  the  Israelites, 
who  also  themselves  were  idolaters.*!  See  2  Kings  iii. 
26,  27. 

"  Iphianassa,  as  story  says,  was  daughter  of  Proetus,  king  of  the  Argives,  who 
preferring  herself  in  beauty  to  Juno,  was  struck  with  such  a  madness  as  to  beheve 
lierself  to  be  a  cow  :  but  was  afterward  cured  by  Melampus,  a  famous  physician,  to 
whom  she  was  given  in  marriage. 

P  Or,  than  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  :  for  Iphigenia,  see  note  on  p.  388. 

q  Dr.  Gill  agrees  with  our  author,  that  the  king  of  Moab  sacrified  his  own  son;  and 
thinks  that  he  might  be  induced  to  offer  him  thus  publicly  on  the  wall,  that  it  might 
be  seen  by  the  camp  of  Israel,  and  move  their  compassion  ;  but  rather  that  he  did  it 
as  a  religious  action  to  appease  the  Deity  by  a  human  sacrifice  ;  and  that  it  was  offered 
eitherto  the  true  God,  in  imitation  of  Abraham,  or  to  his  idol  Chemosh,  the  sun.  It  was 
usual  with  the  heathens,  particularly  the  Phoenicians,  when  in  calamity  and  distress, 
to  offer  up  what  was  most  dear  and  valuable  to  them,  see  p.  381.  Dr.  Gill  seems  of 
opinion  that  the  cause  why  the  three  kings  broke  up  the  siege  was,  that  after  this 
barbarous  and  shocking  sacrifice,  the  Moabites  became  quite  desperate,  and  that  the 
kings,  seeing  them  resolved  to  sell  their  lives  so  dear,  and  to  hold  out  to  the  last 

VOL.  IX.  2    D 


394  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

We  shall  conclude  this  train  of  testimonies  with  that 
noted  account  of  the  Rugiani,  certain  inhabitants  of  an 
island  of  Sclavonia,  related  by  Albertus  Crantzius,  from 
which  we  may  learn  the  dreadful  judgment  of  God  against 
a  late  superstition  of  Christians. 

'  Some  preachers  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,'  who  and  what 
they  were  the  historian  shews, '  converted  the  whole  island  of 
the  Rugiani  to  the  faith  :  then  they  built  an  oratory  in  ho- 
nour of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  memory 
of  St.  Vitus,  patron  of  Corveia.  But  after,  by  divine  per- 
mission, matters  were  changed,  and  the  Rugiani  fell  off  from 
the  faith,  having  instantly  expelled  the  priests  and  Chris- 
tians, they  converted  their  religion  into  superstition  ;^  for 
they  worship  St.  Vitus,  whom  we  acknowledge  as  a  martyr 
and  servant  of  Christ,  as  God ;  nor  is  there  any  barbarous 
people  under  heaven,  that  more  dread  Christians  and  priests : 
whence  also,  in  peculiar  honour  of  St.  Vitus,  they  have  been 
accustomed  to  sacrifice,  yearly,  any  Christian  that  may  ac- 
cidently  fall  into  their  hands.'  A  more  horrible  issue  of  Chris- 
tianity sinking  into  superstition,  would,  perhaps,  be  diffi- 
cult to  be  found.  But  we  are  now  tired  of  dwelling;  on  such 
horrid  rites  and  abominable  sacrifices.  Forasmuch,  then,  as 
we  ourselves  are  the  offspring  of  those  who  are  wholly  pol- 
luted with  such  sacrifices,  and  by  nature  not  better  or  wiser 
than  they;  but  only,  through  the  rich,  free,  and  unspeakable 
mercy  of  God,  have  been  'translated  from  the  power  of  dark- 
ness, and  the  kingdom  of  Satan,  into  his  marvellous  light,' it 
is  most  evident,  that  by  every  tie  we  are  bound  to  offer  and 
devote  ourselves  wholly  to  Christ  our  deliverer,  and  most 
glorious  Saviour,  *  who  hath  loved  us;  and  who  gave  him- 
self for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity,  and 
purify  to  himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous  of  good  works.' 

Thus  the  prophecies  concerning  the  oblation  of  Christ 

man,  thought  fit  to  raise  the  siege.  A  very  natural  explication  of  these  words, '  and 
there  was  great  indignation  against  Israel,'  if  the  indignation  be  understood  as  ap- 
plicable only  to  the  Moabites  :  but  the  concluding  sentence  of  our  author  on  this 
subject  seems  to  imply  it  to  be  his  opinion,  that  there  were  also  dissensions  and  in- 
dignation in  the  allied  army ;  perhaps,  between  the  Edomites,  the  idolatrous  Israel- 
ites, and  the  worshippers  of  the  true  God,  arising  from  the  horrid  spectacle  they  Lad 
witnessed.  This  is  only  ventured  as  a  conjecture,  that  may  better  account  for  the 
sudden  departure  of  tlie  kings. 

"■  Their  religion,  at  best,  had  been  contaminated  with  the  superstitions  of  the  church 
of  Rome. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE   JUSTICE.         395 

being  but  badly  understood,  mankind  were  seduced,  through 
the  instigation  of  the  devil,  to  pollute  themselves  with  these 
inhuman  and  accursed  sacrifices.  Perhaps  too,  that  most 
artful  seducer  had  it  in  view,  by  such  sacrifices,  to  prejudice 
the  more  acute  and  intelligent  part  of  mankind  against  that 
life-giving  sacrifice,  that  was  to  be  destructive  of  his  king- 
dom :  for,  such  now  held  these  atrocious  sacrifices  and  de- 
testable rites  in  abhorrence.  However,  to  keep  the  minds 
of  men  in  suspense,  and  in  subjection  to  himself,  he  did  not 
fail  from  another  quarter,  by  words,  obliquely,  to  spread 
abroad  and  send  forth  ambiguous  oracles,  as  if  such  rites 
and  sacrifices  were  of  no  avail  for  the  expiation  of  sins : 
thence  these  verses  in  Cato's  Distichs  ; 

Cum  sis  ipse  noccns  moritur  cur  victima  pro  te? 
Stultitia  est  raorte  alterius  spcrare  salutem. 

'  Since  it  is  thyself  that  art  guilty,  why  need  any  victim 
die  for  thee?  It  is  madness  to  expect  salvation  from  the 
death  of  another.' 

I  have  no  doubt  but  that  this  last  verse  is  a  diabolical 
oracle. 

By  such  deceitful  practices  the  old  serpent,  inflamed 
with  envy,  and  being  himself  for  ever  lost,  because  he  could 
not  eradicate  every  sense  of  avenging  justice  (which  is  as  a 
curb  to  restrain  the  fury  of  the  wicked)  from  the  minds  of 
men,  wished  to  lead  them  into  mazes,  that  he  might  still 
keep  them  the  slaves  of  sin,  and  subject  to  his  own  do 
minion. 

There  have  been,  and  still  are,  some  of  mankind,  I  con 
fess  it,  who,  from  indulging  their  vices,  are  seared  in  their 
consciences,  and  whose  minds  are  become  callous  by  the 
practice  of  iniquity  ;  who,  flattering  themselves  to  their  own 
destruction,  have  falsely  conceived,  either  that  God  does 
not  trouble  himself  about  such  things,  or  that  he  can  be 
easily  appeased,  and  without  any  trouble.     Hence  that  pro- 
fane wretch,  introduced  by  Erasmus,  after  having  settled 
matters  with  the  Dominican  commissaries,  to  a  jolly  com- 
panion  of  his  own,  when  he  asked  him,   'Whether  God 
would  ratify  the  bargain?'  answers,  'I  fear  rather  lest  the 
devil  should  not  ratify  it,  for  God  by  nature  is  easy  to  be 
appeased.'     It  is  from  the  same  idea,  that  many  of  the  bar- 
barous natives  of  America  idly  fancying  that  there  are  two 

2  D  2 


396         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

gods,  one  good,  and  another  evil,  say,  that  there  is  no  need 
to  offer  sacrifices  to  the  good  one,  because  being  naturally 
good,  he  is  not  disposed  to  hurt  or  injure  any  one  :  but  they 
use  all  possible  care,  both  by  words  and  actions,  and  every 
kind  of  horrible  sacrifice,  to  please  the  evil  one.  Likewise 
those,  who  are  called  by  Mersennus,  Deists,  exclaim,  *  that 
the  bigots,  or  superstitiously  religious,  who  believe  in  in- 
fernal punishments,  are  worse  than  Atheists  who  deny  that, 
there  is  a  God.'  So  too,  some  new  masters  among  our  own 
countrymen  talk  of  nothing,  in  their  discourses,  but  of  the 
goodness  of  God :  his  supreme  right,  dominion,  and  vindica- 
tory justice,  are  of  no  account  with  them  :  but  he  himself 
knows  how  to  preserve  his  glory  and  his  truth  pure  and  en- 
tire, in  spite  of  the  abilities,  and  without  regard  to  the  deli- 
cacy of  these  fashionable  and  dainty  gentlemen. 

But  Rutherford,  on  Providence,  answers,  that  *  the  Gen- 
tiles formerly  borrowed  their  purgations  and  lustrations*  from 
the  Jews,  and  not  from  the  light  of  nature  ;'  but  he  must  be 
a  mere  novice  in  the  knowledge  of  these  matters,  into  whose 
mind  even  the  slightest  thought  of  that  kind  could  enter. 
For  I  believe  there  is  no  one  who  doubts  the  custom  and 
ceremony  of  sacrificing  among  the  Gentile  nations  to  be 
much  more  ancient  than  the  Mosaic  institutions.  Nor  can 
any  one  imagine,  that  this  universal  custom  among  all  na- 
tions, tribes  and  people,  civilized  and  barbarous,  unknown 
to  one  another,  differently  situated  and  scattered  all  over 
the  world,  could  have  first  arisen  and  proceeded  from  the 
institutions  of  the  Jews. 

*  But,'  says  he,  'the  light  is  dark,  that  a  sinful  creature 
could  dream  of  being  able  to  perform  a  satisfaction,  and 
make  propitiatory  expiations  to  an  infinite  God  incensed, 
and  such  too  as  would  be  satisfactory  for  sin  :'  yea,  I  say, 
that  a  sinful  creature  could  perform  this  is  false,  and  a  pre- 
sumption only  arising  from  that  darkness  which  we  are  in 
by  nature :  but  notwithstanding  it  is  true,  that  God  must  be 
appeased  by  a  propitiatory  sacrifice,  if  we  would  that  our 
sins  should  be  forgiven  us ;  and  this  much  he  hath  pointed 
out  to  all  mankind  by  that  light  of  nature,  obscure  indeed, 

'  That  is,  their  acts  or  ceremonies  of  cleansing  or  purifying  themselves  from  guilt 
by  sacrifice  or  otherwise  ;  the  latter  word  more  particularly  means  the  operation  of 
cleansing  by  water. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         397 

but  not  dark.     Nor  is  it  necessary,  in  order  to  prove  this, 
that  we  should  have  recourse  to  the  fabulous  antiquities  of 
the  Egyptians,  the  very  modest  writer  of  which,  Manetho, 
the  high-priest  of  Heliopolis,  who  lived  in  the  time  of  Pto- 
lemy Philadelphus,  and  took  his  history  from  the  Seriadic 
Hieroglyphical"  obelisks,  writes,  that  the  Egyptian  empire 
had  endured  to  the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great,  through 
thirty-one  dynasties,''  containing  a  period  of  five  thousand 
three  hundred  and  fifty-three  years  :  this  is  the  sum  of  the 
years  according  to  that  writer,  as   Scaliger  collects  it,  to 
which  Vossius  has  added  two  years.     But  other  Egyptians 
have  been,  by  no  means,  satisfied  with  this  period  of  time. 
'For,  from  Isiris  and  Isis,  to  the  reign  of  Alexander,  who 
built  a  city  of  his  own  name  in  Egypt,  they  reckon  more 
than  ten  thousand  years;  and  as  some  write  little  less  than 
thirteen  thousand  years,'  says  Diodorus ;  during  which  pe- 
riod of  time,  they  say  that  the  sun  had  four  times  changed 
his  course,  for  that  he  had  twice  risen  in  the  west  and  set 
in  the  east:  which  things,  though  they  may  seem  the  dreams 
of  madmen,  strictly  and  properly  understood  ;  yet  some  very 
learned  men  entertain  a  hope,  by  means  of  the  distinction  of 
the  years  which  the  Egyptians  used,  and  the  description  of 
their  festivals,  of  reconciling   them  with  the  truth   of  the 
Holy  Scriptures. 

But  passing  over  these  things,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted, 
that  Jupiter  Amnion,  among  the  Egyptians,  was  no  other 
than  Cham,  the  son  of  Noah,  and  Bacchus,  Noah  himself; 
and  that  Vulcan,  among  other  nations,  was  Tubal  Cain ;  to 
all  whom,  and  to  others,  sacrifices  were  offered  before  the 
birth  of  Moses.  What  too  do  they  say  to  this?  that  Job, 
among  the  Gentiles,  offered  burnt-offerings  before  the  insti- 
tution of  the  Mosaic  ceremonies  :  see  chap.  i.  5.  xlii.  8. 
And  Jethro,  the  priest  of  Midian,  offered  a  burnt-offering 
and  sacrifices  to  God,  even  in  the  very  camp  of  the  Israel- 
ites in  the  wilderness,  Exod.  viii.  Either  then  the  sacrifice 
of  Cain  and  Abel,  or  that  of  Adam  himself  and  Eve,  con- 

"  Hieroglypliics  are  emblems  or  pictures  that  were  used  in  the  first  method  of 
writing  ;  but  after  characters  were  introduced,  they  became  generally  unintelligible, 
and  contributed  much  to  promote  idolatry.  They  were  used  by  the  Egyptian 
priests  to  conceal  the  mysteries  of  their  religion  from  the  vulgar,  and  were  thence 
called  hieroglyphics,  i.  e.  sacred  engravings  or  carvings.  They  were  originally  en- 
graven or  carved  on  walls  and  obelisks. 

"  A  dynasty,  in  history,  means  a  succession  of  kings  in  the  same  line. 


398         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

sisting  of  those  beasts,  of  whose  skins,  coats  were  made  to 
them  by  God,^  and  by  whose  blood  the  covenant  was  rati- 
fied, which  could  not  have  been  made  with  them  after  their 
fall  without  shedding  of  blood,  gave  the  first  occasion  to 
mankind  of  discharging  that  persuasion,  concerning  the  ne- 
cessity of  appeasing  the  offended  Deity,  which  hath  arisen 
from  the  light  of  nature,  through  this  channel  of  sacrificing. 
Yea,  it  is  evident  that  this  innate  notion  concerning  vindi- 
catory justice,  and  the  observation  of  its  exercise  and  egress 
have  given  rise  to  all  divine  worship.  Hence  that  expres- 
sion, *  primus  in  orbe  Deos  fecit  tlmor :'  '  fear  first  created 
gods.'  And  hence  these  verses  in  Virgil,  spoken  by  king 
Evander. 

Non  haec  solennia  nobis,  &c. 

'  These  rites,  these  altars,  and  this  feast,  O  King  I 

From  no  vain  fears,  or  superstition  spring  ; 
Or  blind  devotion,  or  from  blinder  chance; 
Or  heady  zeal,  or  brutal  ignorance  : 
But  sav'd  from  danger,  with  a  grateful  sense. 
The  labours  of  a  god  we  recompense. 

But  I  do  not  mention  these  things,  as  if  it  were  my  opi- 
nion that  sacrifices  are  prescribed  by  the  law  of  nature  :* 
but,  from  the  agreement  of  mankind  in  the  ceremony  of  sa- 
crificing, I  maintain,  that  they  have  possessed  a  constant 
sense  of  sin  and  vindicatory  justice,  discovering  to  them 
more  and  more  of  this  rite,  from  its  first  commencement,  by 
means  of  tradition. 

But  to  return  from  this  digression  :  it  appears,  that  such 
a  presumption  of  corrective  justice  is  implanted  in  all  by 
nature,  that  it  cannot  by  any  means  be  eradicated  ;  but 
since  these  universal  conceptions  by  no  means  relate  to 
what  may  belong,  or  not  belong  to  God  at  his  free  pleasure, 
it  follows  that  sin-avenging  justice  is  natural  to  God  :  the 
point  that  was  to  be  proved. 

I  shall  only  add,  in  one  word,  that  an  argument  from  the 
consent  of  all,'is  by  consent  of  all  allowed  to  be  very  strong: 

y  Gen.  iii.  21.  '  Unto  Adam  also,  and  to  his  wife,  did  the  Lord  God  make  coats 
of  skins  and  clothed  thera.' 

^  The  most  of  the  Romish  clergy,  says  our  author,  maintain  this  opinion,  that  so 
they  may  pave  the  way  for  establishing  the  blasphemous  sacrifice  of  the  mass.  Thus 
Less  :  '  on  Justice  and  Right:'  Saarez,  book  2.  however,  is  of  a  different  opinion; 
'  for,'  says  be,  '  there  is  no  natural  precept,  from  which  it  can  be  sufficiently  gathered 
that  a  determination  to  any  particular  mode  of  that  worship  is  at  all  necessary  to 
good  morals.'     In  p.  3.  of  his  Theol.  on  quest.  8.  distinct.  71.  sect.  8. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       399 

For  thus  says  the  philosopher,   '  what  is  admitted  by  all, 
we  also  admit ;  but  he  who  would  destroy  such  faith  can 
himself  advance  nothing  more  credible.'  Aristotle,  Nicom.  3. 
And  Hesiod  says, 

*  That  sentiment  cannot  be  altogether  groundless,  which 
many  people  agree  in  publishing.'  And  'when  we  discourse 
of  the  eternity  of  the  soul,'  says  Seneca, '  the  consent  of 
mankind,  is  considered  as  a  weighty  argument;  I  content 
myself  with  this  public  persuasion.'     Seneca.  Ep.  117. 

And  again,  Aristotle  says, 

*  It  is  a  very  strong  proof,  if  all  shall  agree  in  what  we 
shall  say.'  And  that  observation  another  author  concurs, 
*  The  things  that  are  commonly  agreed  on  are  worthy  of 
credit.'    And  here  endeth  the  second  argument. 


CHAP.  V. 

The  third  argument.  This  divine  attribute  demonstrated  in  the  worhs  of 
Providence.  That  passage  of  the  apostle  to  the  Romans,  cbap.  i.  18. 
considered.  Anger,  what  it  is.  The  definitions  of  the  philosophers. 
The  opinion  of  Lactantius  concerning  the  anger  of  God.  Anger  often 
asci-ibed  to  God  in  the  Hob/  Scriptures.  In  what  sense  this  is  done.  The 
divine  anger  denotes,  I.  The  effect  of  anger.  2.  The  will  of  punishing. 
What  that  will  is  in  God.  Why  the  justice  of  God  is  expressed  hy 
ana-er.  The  manifestation  of  the  divine  anger,  what  it  is.  How  it  is 
revealed  from  heaven.  The  sum  of  the  argument.  The  fourth  argu- 
ment. Vindicatory  justice  revealed  in  the  cross  of  Christ.  The  attributes 
of  God.  How  displayed  in  Christ.  Heads  of  other  arguments.  The  con- 
clusion. 

It  remains  then,  that  we  should  now  consider,  in  the  third 
place,  what  testimony  God  has  given,  and  is  still  giving  to 
this  essential  attribute  of  his  in  the  works  of  providence. 
This  Paul  takes  notice  of;  Rom.  i.  18.  '  For  the  wrath  of 
God,'  says  he,  'is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  ungodli- 
ness and  unrighteousness  of  men,  who  hold  the  truth  in  un- 
righteousness.' 

The  philosopher,  Aristotle,  says,  that  anger  is, '  A  desire 
of  punishing  on  account   of  an  apparent  neglect.' '     A  de- 

»  Book  vili.  chap.  6.  of  his  Topics.  , 


400        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

finition,  perhaps,  not  altogether  accurate.  Seneca  says,  that 
Aristotle's  definition  of  anger,  that  it  is  *  a  desire  of  requiting 
pain,'  differs  but  little  from  his  own,  viz.  *  That  anger  is  a 
desire  of  inflicting  punishment,'  book  i.  of  anger,  chap.  iii. 
where  he  discusses  it  with  great  elegance,  according  to  the 
maxims  of  the  Stoics.  But  Aristotle  reckons  aopyrfcnav^ 
among  vices,  or  extremes  in  the  7th  chapter  of  the  2d  book 
of  his  Ethics  to  Nicomedes.  But  Phavorinus  says,  that 
'  anger  is  a  desire  to  punish  the  person  appearing  to  have 
injured  you,  contrary  to  what  is  fit  and  proper.'  But  in 
whatever  manner  it  be  defined,  it  is  beyond  a  doubt  that  it 
cannot,  properly  speaking,  belong  to  God.  Lactantius 
Firmianus,  therefore,  is  lashed  by  the  learned,  who,  in  his 
book  '  of  the  anger  of  God,'  chap.  iv.  in  refuting  the  Stoics, 
who  contend,  that  anger  ought  not  in  any  manner  whatever 
to  be  ascribed  to  God,  has  ventured  to  ascribe  to  the  Deity 
commotions  and  affections  of  mind,  but  such  as  are  just  and 
good.  Suarez,  however,  excuses  him,  in  his  disputation 
*  of  the  divine  justice,'  sect.  5.  and  contends,  that  the  na- 
ture of  anger  is  very  specially  preserved  in  the  disposition 
of  punishing  offences. 

But  however  this  matter  be,  certain  it  is,  that  God  as- 
sumes no  affection  of  our  nature  so  often  to  himself,  in 
Scripture,  as  this  :  and  that  too,  in  words,  which  for  the 
most  part,  in  the  Old  Testament,  denotes  the  greatest  com- 
motion of  mind.  Wrath,  fury,  the  heat  of  great  anger,  in- 
dignation, hot  anger,  smoking  anger,  wrathful  anger,  anger 
appearing  in  the  countenance,  inflaming  the  nostrils,  rousing 
the  heart,  flaming,  and  consuming,  are  often  assigned  to  him, 
and  in  words  too,  which,  among  the  Hebrews,  express  the 
parts  of  the  body  affected  by  such  commotions.'^ 

In  fine,  there  is  no  perturbation  of  the  mind,  no  com- 
motion of  the  spirits,  no  change  of  the  bodily  parts,  by 
which  either  the  materiality,  or  formality*^  (as  they  phrase 
it)  of  anger  is  expressed,  when  we  are  most  deeply  affected 
thereby,  which  he  has  not  assumed  to  himself. 

*♦  A  deprivation  of  irascibility. 

c  Numb.  XXV.  4.  Dent.  xiii.  17.  Josh.  vii.  26.  Psal.  Ixxviii.  49.  Isa.  xiii.  9. 
Deut.  xxix.  24.  Judges  ii.  14.  Tsal,  Ixxiv.  ].  Ixix.  24.  Isa.  xxx.  30.  Lam.  ii.  d.Ezek. 
V.  15.  Isa.  xxxiv.  2.  2  Cliron.  xxviii.  11.  Ezra  x.  14.  Hab.  iii.  8.  12. 

<*  The  materiality  of  anger  is,  what  is  essentially  necessary  to  constitute  anger  ; 
tlie  formality  means  its  external  marks  and  characters. 


A    DISSERTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        401 

But  since  with  God  *  there  is  no  variableness,  neither 
shadow  of  turning,'  beyond  all  doubt  it  will  be  worth  while 
strictly  to  examine  what  he  means  by  this  description  of  his 
most  holy  and  unchangeable  nature,  so  well  accommodated 
to  our  weak  capacities.  Every  material  circumstance,  such 
as,  in  us,  is  the  commotion  of  the  blood,  and  gall  about  the 
heart,  and  likewise  those  troublesome  affections  of  sorrow 
and  pain,  with  which  it  is  accompanied,  being  entirely  ex- 
cluded, we  shall  consider,  what  this  anger  of  God  means. 

First,  Then  it  is  manifest,  that  by  the  anger  of  God,  the 
effects  of  anger  are  denoted.  '  God  is  not  unrighteous  who 
taketh  vengeance;'  Kom.  iii.  5.  And  it  is  said,  Eph.  v.  6. 
'  Because  of  these  things,  the  wrath  of  God  cometh  upon 
the  children  of  disobedience.'  That  is,  God  will  most  as- 
suredly punish  them.  Hence  the  frequent  mention  of  the 
wrath  to  come  ;  that  is,  the  last  and  everlasting  punishment. 
Thus,  that  great  and  terrible  day,  *  in  which  God  will  judge 
the  world  by  that  man  whom  he  hath  ordained,'  is  called  *  the 
day  of  his  wrath,'  because  it  is  the  day  of 'the  revelation  of 
the  righteous  judgment  of  God ;'  Rom.  ii.  5.  And  he  is  said 
to  be  slow  to  wrath,  because  he  oftentimes  proceeds  slowly, 
as  it  seems  to  us,  to  inflict  punishment,  or  recompense  evil. 
But,  perhaps,  this  difficulty  is  better  obviated  by  Peter,  who 
removes  every  idea  of  slowness  from  God,  but  ascribes  to 
him  patience  and  long-suffering  in  Christ  towards  the  faith- 
ful ;  and  of  this  dispensation,  even  the  whole  world,  in  a 
secondary  sense,  are  made  partakers.  '  The  Lord  is  not  slack,' 
says  he,  *  concerning  his  promise  (the  promise,  viz.  of  a 
future  judgment),  as  some  men  count  slackness,  but  is  lono-- 
suffering  to  us-ward,  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but 
that  all  should  come  to  repentance  ;'  2  Pet.  iii.  8,  9. 

Nay,  the  threatening  of  punishment  is  sometimes  de- 
scribed by  the  words  anger,  fury,  wrath,  and  fierce  wrath. 
Thus,  Jonah  iii.  9.  '  Who  can  tell  if  God  will  turn  and 
repent,  and  turn  away  from  his  fierce  anger,  that  we  perish 
not;'  that  is,  whether  he  may  not,  upon  our  humiliation  and 
repentance,  avert  from  us  the  grievous  punishment  denounced 
by  the  prophet. 

But,  secondly.  It  denotes  a  constant  and  immutable  will 
in  God  of  avenging  and  punishing,  by  a  just  punishment, 
every  injury,  transgression,  and  sin.     And  hence  that  ex- 


402        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

pression,  Rom.  ix.  22.  '  What  if  God  willing  to  shew  his 
anger ;'  that  is,  his  justice,  or  constant  will  of  punishing 
sinners :  for  when  any  external  operations  of  the  Deity  are 
described  by  a  word  denoting  a  human  affection  that  is  wont 
to  produce  such  effects,  the  Holy  Scripture  means  to  point 
out  to  us  some  perfection  perpetually  resident  in  God, 
whence  these  operations  flow,  and  which  is  their  proper  and 
next  principle.* 

And  what  is  that  perfection  but  this  justice,  of  which  we 
are  discoursing?  For  we  must  remove  far  from  God  every 
idea  of  anger,  properly  so  called,  which,  in  respect  of  its 
causes  and  effects,  and  of  its  own  nature,  supposes  even  the 
greatest  perturbation,  change,  and  inquietude  of  all  the  af- 
fections, in  its  subject ;  and  yet  we  are  under  the  necessity 
of  ascribing  to  him  a  nature  adapted  to  effect  those  opera- 
tions, which  are  reckoned  to  belong  to  anger.  But  since 
the  Scriptures  testify,  that  God  works  these  works,  as  he  is 
just,  and  because  he  is  just  (and  we  have  proved  it  above), 
it  plainly  appears  that,  that  perfection  of  the  Divine  nature 
is  nothing  else  but  this  vindicatory  j  ustice.  Whence  Thomas 
Aquinas  asserts^,  that  anger  is  not  said  to  be  in  God,  in  allu- 
sion to  any  passion  of  the  mind,  but  to  the  judgment  or  de- 
cisions of  his  justice.  Nay,  that  anger  may  not  only  be  re- 
duced to  justice,  but  that  the  words  themselves  are  synoni- 
mous,  and  that  they  are  taken  so  in  Scripture,  is  certain. 
Psal.  vii.  6.  9.  '  Arise,  O  Lord,  in  thine  anger,  lift  up  thy- 
self because  of  the  rage  of  mine  enemies  :  and  awake  for  me 
to  the  judgment  that  thou  hast  commanded.  O  let  the  wick- 
edness of  the  wicked  come  to  an  end ;  but  establish  the 
just :  for  the  righteous  God  trieth  the  heart  and  reins.'  To 
judge  in  anger,  or  with  justice,  are  phrases  of  the  same  im- 
port. Psal.  Ivi.  7.  '  Shall  they  escape  by  iniquity  ?  in  thine 
anger  cast  down  the  people,  O  God.'  Or,  in  justice,  cast 
them  down,  because  of  their  iniquity.  Thus,  when  he  justly 
destroyed  the  people  of  Israel  by  the  king  of  Babylon,  he 
says,  it  came  to  pass  through  his  anger  ;  2  Kings  xxiv.  20. 
'For  through  the  anger  of  the  Lord,  it  came  to  pass  in  Jeru- 
salem and  Judah,  until  he  had  cast  them  out  from  his  pre- 
sence, that  Zedekiah  rebelled  against  the  king  of  Babylon.' 

«  That  is,  the  principle  from  which  tlicy  iinmediately  flow, 
f  Quest.  47.  article  1. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       403 

But  the  apostle  says,  that  this  anger  or  punitory  justice 
is  '  revealed  from  heaven.'  The  apostle  uses  the  same  word 
here,  that  is  translated  '  revealed,'  in  the  preceding  verse, 
when  speaking  of  the  manifestation  or  revelation  of  the  righ- 
teousness of  faith  in  the  gospel.  Therefore,  some  have  been 
of  opinion,  that  the  apostle  here  asserts,  that  this  very  anger 
of  God  is  again  and  again  made  known  and  manifest,  or 
openly  declared  in  the  gospel  against  unbelievers.  But  to 
what  purpose,  then,  is  there  any  mention  made  of  heaven, 
whence  that  manifestation  or  revelation  is  said  to  have  been 
made  ?  The  apostle,  therefore,  uses  the  word  in  a  different 
sense  in  the  18th  verse  from  that  which  it  is  used  in,  in  the 
preceding.  There  it  means  a  manifestation  by  the  preaching 
of  the  word  ;  here  it  signifies  a  declaration  by  examples ; 
and  therefore  a  certain  person  hath,  not  improperly,  trans- 
lated the  word,  *  is  laid  open,'  or  *  clearly  appears ;'  that  is, 
is  proved  by  numberless  instances.  Moreover,  this  verse  is 
the  principal  of  the  arguments,  by  which  the  apostle  proves 
the  necessity  of  justification  by  faith  in  the  remission  of 
sins  through  the  blood  of  Christ ;  because  that  all  have 
sinned,  and  thereby  rendered  God  their  open  and  avowed 
enemy. 

The  apostle  then  affirms,  that  God  hath  taken  care  that 
his  anger  against  sin,  or  that  his  justice  should  appear  by  in- 
numerable examples  of  punishments  inflicted  on  mankind 
for  their  sins,  in  his  providential  government  of  the  world  ; 
and  that  it  should  appear  in  so  clear  a  manner,  that  there 
should  be  no  room  left  for  conjectures  about  the  matter. 
Not  that  punishment  is  always  inflicted  on  the  wicked  and 
impious,  while  in  this  world,  or  at  least  that  it  appears  to  be 
so,  for  very  many  of  them  enjoy  all  the  pleasures  of  a  rich 
and  flourishing  outward  estate;  but  besides,  that  he  exercises 
his  anger  on  their  consciences,  as  we  proved  before ;  and 
that  the  external  good  things  of  fortune,  as  they  call  them, 
are  only  a  fattening  of  them  for  the  day  of  slaughter  ;  even 
in  this  life  he  oft-times,  in  the  middle  of  their  career,  exer- 
cises his  severe  judgments  against  the  public  enemies  of 
heaven ;  the  monsters  of  the  earth,  the  architects  of  wicked- 
ness, sunk  in  the  mire  and  filth  of  their  vices;  and  that  too, 
even  to  the  entire  ruin  and  desolation  both  of  whole  nations, 
and  of  particular  individuals,  whom,  by  a  remarkable  pu- 


404        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

nishment,  he  thinks  proper  to  make  an  example  and  spec- 
tacle of  to  the  world,  both  to  angels  and  to  men. 

Therefore,  although  *  God  willing  to  shew  his  wrath,  and 
to  make  his  power  known,'  not  in  that  way  only,  viz.  by  ex- 
ercising public  punishments  in  this  life,  of  which  we  are  now 
speaking,  '  endured  with  much  long-suffering  the  vessels  of 
wrath,  fitted  to  destruction  :'  and  though  he  should  not  in- 
stantly dart  his  lightnings  against  all,  and  every  individiial 
of  the  abandoned  and  profane,  yet  mankind  will  easily  dis- 
cerns  what  the  mind  and  thoughts  of  God  are,  what  his  right 
and  pleasure,  and  of  what  kind  his  anger  and  justice  are 
with  regard  to  every  sin  whatever.     Therefore,  the  apostle 
affirms,  that  the  anger  of  God,  of  which  he  gives  only  some 
instances,  is  by  these  judgments  openly  declared  against  all 
unrighteousness  and  ungodliness  of  men  whatever  ;  whether 
they  fail  in  the  worship  and  duty  which  they  owe  to  God,  or 
in  the  duties  which  it  is  incumbent  on  them  to  perform  to 
one  another.     Moreover,  that  the  solemn  revelation  of  this 
divine  justice  consists,  not  only  in  those  judgments  which 
sooner  or  later  he  hath  exercised  upon  particular  persons, 
but  also  in  the  whole  series  of  his  divine  dispensations  to- 
wards men,  in  which,  as  he  gives  testimony  both  to  his  good- 
ness and  patience,  inasmuch  as '  he  maketh  his  sun  to  shine 
on  the  evil  and  the  good,  and  sendeth  rain  on  the  just,  and 
the  unjust,*"  and  leaves  not  himself  without  a  witness,  in  that 
he  doth  good,  and  gives  us  rain  from  heaven,  and  fruitful 
seasons,  filling  our  hearts  with  food  and  gladness  ;'  so  also 
he  gives  equally  clear  signs  and  testimonies  of  his  anger,  se- 
verity, and  indignation,  or  of  his  punitory  justice.     Hence, 
on  account  of  the  efficacy  of  the  divine  anger,  exercising  its 
power  and  influence  far  and  near,  this  visible  world,  as  if  the 
very  fuel  of  the  curse,  is  appointed  as  the  seat  and  abode  of 
all  kinds  of  misery,  grief,  lamentation,  cares,  wrath,  vanity, 
and  inquietude.     Why  need  I  mention  tempests,  thunders, 
lightnings,  deluges,  pestilences,  with  many  things  more,  by 
means  of  which,  on  account  of  the  wickedness  of  man,  uni- 
versal nature  is  struck  with  horror.     All  these,  beyond  a 
doubt,  have  a  respect  to  the  revelation  of  God's  anger  or 
justice,  against  the  unrighteousness  and  ungodliness  of  men. 

S  Viz.  from  those  instances  of  punishment  which  he  is  pleased,  in  his  wisdom, 
sometimes  openly  and  awfully  to  inflict  upon  the  wicked, 
h  Man,  V.  46.  Acts  xiv.  17. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         405 

Moreover,  the  apostle  testifies  this  revelation  to  be  made 
from  heaven.    Even  the  most  abandoned  cannot  but  observe 
punishments  of  various  kinds  making  havoc  every  where  in 
the  world,  and  innumerable  evils  brooding,  as  it  were,  over 
the  very  texture  of  the  universe.     But  because  they  wish 
for  and  desire  nothing  more  ardently,  than  either  that  there 
were  no  God,  or  that  he  paid  no   regard  to  human  affairs, 
they  either  really  ascribe,  or  pretend  to  ascribe  all  these 
things  to  chance,  fortune,  the  revolutions  of  the  stars  and 
their  influence,  or  finally,  to  natural  causes.     In   order  to 
free  the  minds  of  men  from  this  pernicious  deceit  of  athe- 
ism, the  apostle  affirms  that  all  these  things   come  to  pass 
from  heaven  ;  that  is,  under  the  direction  of  God,  or,  by  a 
divine  power  and  providence  punishing  the  sins  and  wick- 
edness of  men,  and  manifesting  the  justice  of  God.     Thus, 
'  The  Lord  rained  upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  brimstone  and 
fire  from  the  Lord  out  of  heaven ;'  Gen.  xix.  24.      Which 
cities,  by  that  punishment  inflicted  on  them  from  heaven,  he 
hath  set  up  as  an  example,  in  every  future  age,  to  all  those 
who  should  afterward  persevere  in  the   like  impieties.     To 
these  considerations  add,  that  the  apostle,  from  this  demon- 
stration of  the  divine  anger  from  heaven  against  the  sins  of 
men,    argues   the   necessity   of   appointing    an    atonement 
through  the  blood  of  Christ;  ver.  23 — 25.  which  would  by 
no  means  follow,  but  upon  this  supposition,  that  that  anger 
of  God  was  such  that  it  could  not  be  averted  without  the 
intervention  of  an  atonement. 

But  not  to  be  tedious,  it  is  evident  that  God,  by  the 
works  of  his  providence,  in  the  government  of  this  world, 
gives  a  most  copious  testimony  to  his  vindicatory  justice, 
not  inferior  to  that  given  to  his  goodness,  or  any  other  of 
his  attributes;  which  testimony,  concerning  himself  and 
his  nature,  he  makes  known,  and  openly  exhibits  to  all  by 
innumerable  examples,  constantly  provided  and  appointed 
for  that  purpose.  He  then  who  shall  deny  this  justice  to 
be  essential  to  God,  may  for  the  same  reason  reject  his 
goodness  and  long-suffering  patience. 

The  fourth  argument  shall  be  taken  from  the  revelation  of 
that  name,  glory,  and  nature,  which  God  hath  exhibited  to 
us  in  and  through  Christ;  John  i.  18.  '  No  man  hath  seen 
God  at  any  time ;  the  only-begotten  Son,  who  is  in  the  bo- 
som of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared  him  :'  him  who,  though 


406  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

he  be  light  itself,  and  dwelleth  in  light  inaccessible,  yet  in 
respect  of  us,  who,  without  Christ  are  naturally  blinder  than 
moles,  is  covered  with  darkness.  In  creation,  in  legislation, 
and  in  the  works  of  providence,  God  indeed  hath  plainly 
marked  out  and  discovered  to  us  certain  traces  of  his  power, 
wisdom,  goodness,  justice,  and  long-sufFerance.  But  be- 
sides that,  there  are  some  attributes  of  his  nature,  the  know- 
ledge of  which  could  not  reach  the  ears  of  sinners  but  by 
Christ ;  such  as  his  love  to  his  peculiar  people,  his  sparing 
mercy,  his  free  and  saving  grace  :  and  even  others,  which 
he  hath  made  known  to  us  in  some  measure,  by  the  ways 
and  means  above-mentioned,  we  could  have  no  clear  or  sav- 
ing knowledge  of,  unless  in  and  through  this  same  Christ ; 
'  for  in  him  are  hid  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge :'  in  him,  God  hath  fully  and  clearly  exhibited  him- 
self to  us  to  be  loved,  adored,  and  known ;  and  that  not  only 
in  regard  of  his  heavenly  doctrine,  '  in  which  he  hath 
brought  life  and  immortality  to  light  through  the  gospel  ;'' 
God  finishing  the  revelation  of  himself  to  mankind,  by  the 
mission  and  ministry  of  his  Son  ;  but  also  exhibiting  both 
in  the  person  of  Christ,  and  in  his  mediatorial  office,  the 
brightness  of  his  own  glory,  and  the  express  image  of  his 
person,  he  glorified  his  own  name,  and  manifested  his  na- 
ture, to  all  those  at  least,  who  being  engrafted  into  Christ, 
and  baptized  into  his  Spirit,  enjoy  both  the  Father  and 
the  Son.  But  in  the  whole  matter  of  salvation  by  the  Me- 
diator, God-man,  there  is  no  excellence  of  God,  no  essential 
property,  no  attribute  of  his  nature,  the  glory  of  which  is 
the  chief  end  of  all  his  works,  that  he  hath  more  clearly  and 
eminently  displayed  than  this  punitory  justice. 

It  was  for  the  display  of  his  justice,  that  he  set  forth 
Christ  as  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood.  He 
spared  him  not,  but  laid  the  punishment  of  us  all  upon  him. 
It  was  for  this  that  he  was  pleased  to  bruise  him,  to  put 
him  to  grief,  and  to  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin. 

The  infinite  wisdom  of  God,  his  inexpressible  grace, 
free  love,  boundless  mercy,  goodness,  and  benevolence  to 
men,  in  the  constitution  of  such  a  Mediator,  viz.  a  God-man, 
are  not  more  illustriously  displayed,  to  the  astonishment  of 
men  and  angels,  in  bi-inging  sinful  man  from  death,  con- 
demnation, and  a  state  of  enmity,  into  a  state  of  life,  of  sal- 

»  2  Tim.  i.  10. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        407 

vation,  of  glory,  and  of  union  and  communion  with  himself, 
than  is  this  punitory  justice,  for  the  satisfaction,  manifes- 
tation, and  glory  of  which,  this  whole  scheme,  pregnant  with 
innumerable  mysteries,  was  instituted.  But  that  attribute, 
whose  glory  and  manifestation  God  intended  and  accom- 
plished both  in  the  appointment  of  his  only-begotten  Son 
to  the  office  of  mediator,  and  in  his  mission  must  be  na- 
tural to  him.  And  there  is  no  need  of  arguments  to  prove, 
that  this  was  his  vindicatory  justice.  Yea,  supposing  this 
justice,  and  all  regard  to  it  entirely  set  aside,  the  glory  of 
God's  love  in  sending  his  son,  and  delivering  him  up  to  the 
death  for  us  all,  which  the  Scriptures  so  much  extol,  is  ma- 
nifestly much  obscured,  if  it  do  not  rather  totally  disappear. 
For  what  kind  of  love  can  that  be  which  God  hath  shewn, 
in  doing  what  there  was  no  occasion  for  him  to  do  ? 

We  will  not  at  present  enter  fully  into  the  consideration 
of  other  arguments  by  which  the  knowledge  of  this  truth  is 
supported  ;  among  which  that  of  the  necessity  of  assigning 
to  God  (observing  a  just  analogy)  whatever  perfections  or 
excellencies  are  found  among  the  creatures,  is  not  of  the 
least  importance.  These  we  pass  :  partly  that  we  may  not 
be  tedious  to  the  learned  reader  ;  partly,  because  the  truth 
flows  in  a  channel,  already  sufficiently  replenished  with 
proofs.  It  would  be  easy,  however,  to  shew  that  this  justice 
denotes  the  highest  perfection ;  and  by  no  means  includes 
any  imperfection ;  on  account  of  which  it  should  be  ex- 
cluded from  the  divine  nature  ;  neither  in  the  definition  of 
it  does  one  iota  occur  that  can  imply  any  imperfection; 
but  all  perfection,  simple  or  formal,  simply  and  formally  is 
found  in  God.  But  when  this  perfection  is  employed  in  any 
operation  respecting  another  being,  and  having  for  its  ob- 
ject the  common  good,  it  necessarily  acquires  the  nature  of 
justice. 

I  shall  not  be  farther  troublesome  to  my  readers;  if  what 
has  been  already  said  amount  not  to  proof  sufficient,  I 
know  not  what  is  sufficient.  I  urge  only  one  testimony  more 
from  Scripture  and  conclude. 

It  is  found  in  Heb.  x.  26.  '  For  if  we  sin  wilfully  after 
that  we  have  received  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  there  re- 
maineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a  certain  fearful  look- 
ing for  of  judgment,  and  fiery  indignation.'     But,  perhaps 


408  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

God  will  pardon  without  any  sacrifice ;  the  apostle  is  of 
a  contrary  opinion  ;  *  where  there  is  no  sacrifice  for  sin,'  he 
argues,  that  from  the  very  nature  of  the  thing,  there  must 
be  *a  looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indignation  ;'  the 
very  point  that  was  to  be  proved. 

I  could  heartily  wish  that  some  sinner,  whose  conscience, 
the  hand  of  the  omnipotent  God  hath  lately  touched, '  whose 
sore  ran  in  the  night  and  ceased  not,'  and  whose  '  soul  re- 
fused to  be  comforted,' v/hose  '  grief  is  heavier  than  the  sand 
of  the  sea,' in  whom  'the  arrows  of  the  Almighty  stick  fast, 
the  poison  whereof  drinketh  up  the  Spirit,"'  were  to  estimate 
and  determine  this  difficult  and  doubtful  dispute.     Let  us, 
I  say,  have  recourse  to  a  person,  who  being  convinced  by 
the  Spirit,  of  his  debts  to  God,  is  weighed  down  by  their 
burden,  while  the  sharp  arrows  of  Christ  are  piercing  the 
heart;  Psal.  xlv.  5.  and  let  us  inform  him,  that  God,  with 
the  greatest  ease  by  his  nod,  or  by  the  light  touch  of  his 
finger,  so  to  speak,  can  blot  out,  hide,  and  forgive  all  his 
sins.     Will  he  rest  satisfied  in  such  a  thought?  Will  he  im- 
mediately subscribe  to  it  ?    Will  he  not  rather  exclaim,  *  I 
have  heard  many  such  things,  miserable  comforters  are  ye 
all?^    nay,  ye  are  preachers  of  lies,  physicians  of  no  value.' 
The  terrors  of  the  Lord  which  surround  me,  and  beset  me 
day  and  night,  you  feel  not ;  I  have  to   do  with  the  most 
just,  the  most  holy,  the  supreme  Judge  of  all,  *  who  will  do 
right,   and  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty.'     Therefore 
*  my  days  are  consumed  like  smoke,  and  my  bones  are  burnt 
as  an  hearth  ;  my  heart  is  smitten  and  withered  like  grass  ; 
so  that  T  forget  to  eat  my  bread.     By  reason  of  the  voice  of 
my  groaning,  my  bones  cleave  to  my  skin."™     I  am  afllicted 
and  ready  to  die  from  my  youth  up  ;  while  I  suffer  thy  ter- 
rors, I  am  distracted.     Thy  fierce  wrath  goeth  over  me,  thy 
terrors  have  cut  me  off;'  I  wish  I  were  hid  in  the  grave,  yea, 
even  in  the  pit,  unless  the  judge  himself,  say  to  me,  '  Deli- 
ver him  from  going  down  to  the  pit,  I  have  found  a  ransom.*" 
Indeed,  when  the  recollection  of  that  very  melancholy  pe- 
riod comes  into  mind,  when  first  God  was  pleased  by  his 
Spirit  effectually  to  convince  the  heart  of  me,  a  poor  sinner 
of  sin,  and  when  the  whole  of  God's  controversy  with  me 

k  Job  TU  2—4.  1  Job.  vi.  2.  "»  Psal.  cii.  3—5. 

"'  Psal.  Ixxxviii.  15,  16.  °  Job  xxxiii.  24. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         409 

for  sin  is  again  presented  to  my  view,  I  cannot  sufficiently 
wonder  what  thoughts  could  possess  those  men,  who  have 
treated  of  the  remission  of  sins,  in  so  very  slight,  I  had  al- 
most said,  contemptuous  a  manner.  But  these  reflections 
are  rather  foreign  to  our  present  business. 


CHAP.  VI. 

Another  head  of  the  first  part  of  the  dissertation.  Arguments  for  the  ne- 
cessary egress  of  vindicatory  justice  from  the  supposition  of  sin.  The 
first  argument.  God's  hatred  of  sin ;  what.  Whether  God  by  nature 
hates  si7i,  or  because  he  wills  so  to  do.  Testimonies  from  holy  Scripture. 
Dr.  Twiss's  answer.  The  sum  of  it.  The  same  obviated.  The  relation 
between  obedience  as  to  reward,  and  sin  as  to  punishment,  not  the  same. 
Justice  and  mercy,  in  respect  of  their  exercise,  different.  The  second  ar- 
gument- The  description  of  God  in  the  Scriptures,  in  respect  of  si7i.  In 
what  sense  he  is  culled  a  consuming  fire.  Twiss's  nnsuwr  refuted.  The 
fallacies  of  the  answer. 

We  have  sufficiently  proved,  if  I  he  not  mistaken,  that  sin- 
punishing  justice  is  natural  to  God.  The  opposite  arguments, 
more  numerous  than  weighty,  shall  be  considered  hereafter. 
We  are  now  to  prove  the  second  part  of  the  question,  viz. 
that  the  existence  and  sin  of  a  rational  creature  being  sup- 
posed, the  exercise  of  this  justice  is  necessary.  And  grant- 
ing what  follows  from  what  we  have  already  said  concerning 
the  nature  of  justice,  especially  from  the  first  argument,  our 
proofs  must  necessarily  be  conclusive.    The  first  is  this  : 

He  who  cannot  but  hate  all  sin,  cannot  but  punish  sin ; 
for  to  hate  sin  is,  as  to  the  affection,  to  will  to  punish  it; 
and  as  to  the  effect,  the  punishment  itself.  And  to  be  unable, 
not  to  will  the  punishment  of  sin,  is  the  same  with  the  ne- 
cessity of  punishing  it :  for  he  who  cannot  but  will  to  punish 
sin,  cannot  but  punish  it.  '  For  our  God  is  in  the  heavens, 
he  hath  done  whatsoever  he  pleaseth  ;'  Psal.  cxv.  3.  Now, 
when  we  say  that  God  necessarily  punishes  sin,  we  mean, 
that  on  account  of  the  rectitude  and  perfection  of  his  nature, 
he  cannot  possess  an  indifference  of  will  to  punish.  For  it 
being  supposed  that  God  hates  sin,  he  must  hate  it  either  by 
nature,  or  by  choice  ;  if  it  be  by  nature,  then  we  have  gained 

VOL.    IX.  2    E 


410        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

our  point ;  if  by  choice,  or  because  he  wills  it,  then  it  is 
possible  for  him  not  to  hate  it ;  nay,  he  may  even  justly  will 
the  contrary,  or  exercise  a  contrary  act  about  the  same  ob- 
ject :  for  those  acts  of  the  divine  will  are  most  free,  viz. 
which  have  their  foundation  in  the  will  only  ;  that  is  to  say, 
that  it  is  even  possible  for  him  to  love  sin ;  for  the  divine 
will  is  not  inclined  to  any  object,  but  that  if  it  should  be  in- 
clined to  its  contrary,  that  might,  consistent  with  justice, 
be  done.  This  reasoning  Durandus  agrees  to,  and  this,  Twiss 
urges  as  an  argument :  the  conclusion  then  must  be,  that 
God  may  love  sin,  considered  as  sin : 

Credat  Apella. 

The  sons  of  circumcision  may  receive 

The  wond'rous  tale,  wliich  I  shall  ne'er  believe. — Francis,  Hohace. 

For,  '  God  hates  all  workers  of  iniquity  ;'  Psal.  v.  5.  *  He 
calls  it  the  abominable  thing  that  he  hateth  ;'  Jer.  xliv.  4. 
Besides  these,  other  passages  of  Scripture  testify  that  God 
hates  sin,  and  that  he  cannot  but  hate  it.  *  Thou  art  of  purer 
eyes  than  to  behold  evil,  and  canst  not  look  on  iniquity ;' 
Hab.  i.  13.  On  account  of  the  purity  of  God's  eyes,  that  is, 
of  his  holiness,  an  attribute  which  none  hath  ever  ventured 
to  'deny,  he  cannot  look  on  iniquity,'  that  is,  he^  cannot  but 
hate  it.  *  Thou  art  not  a  God  that  hast  pleasure  in  wicked- 
ness,'says  the  psalmist;  Psal.  v.  4, 5.  that  is,  thou  art  a  God 
who  hatest  all  wickedness,  for  '  evil  shall  not  dwell  with 
thee,  and  the  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  thy  sight,  thou  hatest 
all  the  workers  of  iniquity.'  Is  it  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will 
that  he  here  describes,  which  might  or  might  not  be  exe- 
cuted without  any  injury  to  the  holiness,  purity,  and  justice 
of  God  ?  or,  the  divine  nature  itself,  as  averse  to,  hating  and 
punishing  every  sin?  Why  shall  not  the  foolish  stand  in 
God's  sight?  Is  it  because  he  freely  wills  to  punish  them? 
or,  because  our  God,  to  all  workers  of  iniquity  is  a  consum- 
ing fire  ?  Not  that  the  nature  of  God  can  wax  hot  at  the 
sight  of  sin,  in  a  natural  manner,  as  fire  doth  after  the  com- 
bustible materials  have  been  applied  to  it ;  but,  that  punish- 
ment as  naturally  follows  sin,  as  its  consequence,  on  account 
of  the  pressing  demand  of  justice,  as  fire  consumes  the  fuel 
that  is  applied  to  it. 

But  it  is  not  without  good  reason  that  God,  who  is  love. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        411 

SO  often  testifies  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  his  hatred  and  abomi- 
nation of  sin,  '  the  wicked,  and  him  that  loveth  violence,  his 
soul  hateth  5'  Psal.xi.  5.  Speaking  of  sinners.  Lev.  xxvi.  30. 
he  says,  '  and  my  soul  shall  abhor  you.'  He  calls  sin  that 
abominable  thing  :  there  is  nothing  that  God  hates  but  sin, 
and  because  of  sin  only,  other  things  are  liable  to  his  hatred. 
In  what  sense  passions  and  affections  are  ascribed  to  God, 
and  what  he  would  have  us  to  understand  by  such  a  descrip- 
tion of  his  nature  and  attributes,  is  known  to_  every  body. 
But  of  all  the  affections  of  human  nature,  hatred  is  i^.e  most 
restless  and  turbulent,  and  to  the  person  who  is  under  its 
influence,  and  who  can  neither  divest  himself  of  it,  nor  s^ive 
a  satisfactory  vent  to  its  motions,  the  most  tormenting  and 
vexatious.  For  as  it  takes  its  rise  from  a  disagreement  with 
and  dislike  of  its  object,  so  that  object  is  always  viewed  as 
repugnant  and  offensive  :  no  wonder  then,  that  it  should  rouse 
the  most  vehement  commotions  and  bitterest  sensations. 
But  God,  who  enjoys  eternal  and  infinite  happiness  and 
glory,  as  he  is  far  removed  from  any  such  perturbations,  and 
placed  far  beyond  all  variableness  or  shadow  of  change, 
would  not  assume  this  affection  so  often,  for  our  instruction, 
unless  he  meant  clearly  to  point  out  to  us  this  supreme,  im- 
mutable, and  constant  purpose  of  punishing  sin,  as  that  mon- 
ster, whose  property  it  is  to  be  the  object  of  God's  hatred, 
that  is,  of  the  hatred  of  infinite  goodness,  to  be  natural  and 
essential  to  him. 

The  learned  Twiss  answers,  '  I  cannot  agree,  that  God  by 
nature  equally  punishes  and  hates  sin,  unless  you  mean  that 
hatred  in  the  Deity  to  respect  his  will  as  appointing  a  pu- 
nishment for  sin  :  in  which  sense  I  acknowledge  it  to  be 
true,  that  God  equally,  from  nature  and  necessity,  punishes 
and  hates  sin :  but  I  deny  it  to  be  necessary  that  he  should 
either  so  hate  sin,  or  punish  it ;  if  hatred  be  understood  to 
mean  God's  displeasure,  I  maintain  that  it  is  not  equally 
natural  to  God  to  punish  sin,  and  to  hate  it ;  for  we  main- 
tain it  to  be  necessary  that  every  sin  should  displease  God ; 
but  it  is  not  necessary  that  God  should  punish  every  sin.* 
The  sum  of  the  answer  is  this ;  God's  hatred  of  sin  is  taken 
either  for  his  will  of  punishing  it,  and  so  is  not  natural  to 
God,  or  for  his  displeasure,  on  account  of  sin,  and  so  is  natural 
to  him  :   but  it  does  not  thence  follow,  that  God  necessarily 

2  E  2 


412        A     DISSERTATION   ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

punishes  every  sin,  and  that  he  can  let  no  sin  pass  un- 
punished. 

But,  first.  This  learned  gentleman  denies  what  has  been 
proved  ;  nor  does  he  deign  to  advance  a  word  to  invalidate 
the  proof.  He  denies  that  God  naturally  hates  sin,  hatred 
beino-  taken  for  the  will  of  punishing  ;  but  this  we  have  be- 
fore demonstrated  both  from  Scripture  and  reason.  It 
would  be  easy,  indeed,  to  elude  the  force  of  any  argumentin 
this  manner.  Afterward  he  acknowledges,  that  every  sin 
must  Kecessarily  be  displeasing  to  God ;  this,  then,  depends 
not  on  the  free-will  of  God,  but  on  his  nature;  it  belongs 
then  immutably  to  God,  and  it  is  altogether  impossible  that 
it  should  not  displease  him.  This,  then,  is  supposed,  that  sin 
is  always  displeasing  to  God,  but  that  God  may  or  may  not 
punish  it,  but  pardon  the  sin,  and  cherish  the  sinner,  though 
his  sin  eternally  displease  him  ;  for  that  depends  upon  his 
nature,  which  is  eternally  immutable.  Nor  is  it  possible, 
that  what  hath  been  sin,  should  ever  be  any  thing  but  sin. 
From  this  natural  displeasure,  then,  with  sin,  we  may  "with 
propriety  argue  to  its  necessary  punishment  ;  otherwise, 
what  meaneth  that  despairing  exclam.ation  of  alarmed  hypo- 
crites? 'Who among  us  shall  dwell  with  the  devouringfire? 
Who  among  us  shall  dwell  with  everlasting  burnings  ?'* 

The  learned  doctor  retorts  ; '  Obedience  must  necessarily 
please  God,  but  God  is  not  bound  by  his  justice  necessarily 
to  reward  it.'  But  the  learned  gentleman  will  hardly  main- 
tain, that  the  proportion  between  obedience  as  to  reward, 
and  disobedience  as  to  punishment,  is  the  same ;  for  God  is 
bound  to  reward  no  man  for  obedience  performed,  for  that 
is  due  to  him  by  natural  right;  Luke  xvii.  10.  '  So  likewise 
ye,  when  ye  shall  have  done  all  those  things  which  are  com- 
manded you,  say.  We  are  unprofitable  servants  :  we  have 
done  that  which  was  our  duty  to  do.'  Psal.  xvi.  2.  '  My 
goodness  extendeth  not  unto  thee.'  But  every  man  owes  to 
God  obedience,  or  is  obnoxious  to  a  vicarious  punishment; 
nor  can  the  moral  dependance  of  a  rational  creature  on  its 
Creator  be  otherwise  preserved.  '  The  wages  of  sin  is  death  ; 
but  the  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life  ;'  Rom.  vi.  23. 

Away,  then,  with  all  proud  thoughts  of  equalling  the  pro- 
portion between  obedience  as  to  reward,  and  sin  as  to  pu- 

*  Isa.  xxxiii.  14. 


A     DISSERTATION     O  N^    DIVIXE    JUSTICE.        413 

nishment.    '  Wlio  hath  first  given  to  him,  and  it  shall  be  re- 
compensed unto  him  again  ?     For  of  him,  and  through  him, 
and  to  him,  are  all  things:  to  whom  be  glory  for  ever.  Amen ;' 
Rom.  xi.  35,  36.     '  What  hast  thou,  O  man,  that  thou  hast 
not  received?     But  if  thou  hast  received  it,  why  dost  thou 
'glory,  as  if  thou  hadst  not  received  it?'    1  Cor.  iv.  7.     God 
requireth  nothing  of  us  but  what  he  hath  formerly  given  us, 
and  therefore  he  has  every  right  to  require  it,  although  he 
were  to  bestow  no  rewards.     What?  Doth  not  God  observe 
a  just  proportion  in  the  infliction  of  punishments,  so  that  the 
degrees  of  punishment,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  justice 
should  not  exceed  the  demerit  of  the  transgression  ?    *  Shall 
not  the  judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right?'     But  beware.  Dr. 
Twiss,  of  asserting.  That  there  is  any  proportion  between  the 
eternal  fruition  of  God,  and  the  inexpressible  participation 
of  his  glory,  in  which  he  hath  been  graciously  pleased,  that 
the  reward  of  our  obedience  should  consist,  and  the  obedi- 
ence  of  an  insignificant  reptile,  almost  less  than  nothing. 
Whatever  dignity  or  happiness  we  arrive  at,  we  are  still  God's 
creatures. 

It  is  impossible,  that  he  who  is  blessed  forever  and  ever, 
and  is  so  infinitely  happy  in  his  own  essential  glory,  that  he 
stands  in  no  need  of  us,  or  of  our  services ;  and  who,  in  re- 
quiring all  that  we  are,  and  all  that  we  can  do,  only  requires 
his  own,  can,  by  the  receipt  of  it,  become  bound  in  any  debt 
or  obligation.  For  God,  I  say,  from  the  beginning,  stood  in 
no  need  of  our  praise  ;  nor  did  he  create  us  that  he  might 
have  creatures  to  honour  him,  but  that  agreeable  to  his 
goodness  he  might  conduct  us  to  happiness. 

But  he  again  retorts,  and  maintains,  '  That  God  can 
punish  where  he  does  not  hate  ;  and  therefore,  he  may  hate 
and  not  punish  ;  for  he  punished  his  most  holy  Son,  whom 
God  forbid,  that  we  should  say  he  ever  hated,'  But  besides, 
that  this  mode  of  arguing,  from  opposites,  hardly  holds  good 
in  theology:  though  God  hated  not  his  Son  when  he  pu- 
nished him,  personally  considered,  he  however  hated  the  sins, 
on  account  of  which  he  punished  him  (and  even  himself 
substitutively  considered  with  respect  to  the  effect  of  sin),  no 
less  than  if  they  had  been  laid  to  any  sinner  :  yea,  and  from 
this  argument  it  follows,  that  God  cannot  hate  sin,  and  not 
punish  it ;  for  when  he  laid  sins,  which  he  hates,  to  the 


414        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

charge  of  his  most  holy  Son,  whom  he  loved  with  the  high- 
est love,  yet  he  could  not  but  punish  him. 

The  representation  or  description  of  God,  and  of  the  Di- 
vine nature,  in  respect  of  its  habitude^  to  sin,  which  the 
Scriptures  furnish  us  with,  and  the  description  of  sin,  with 
relation  to  God  and  his  justice,  supply  us  with  a  second  ar- 
gument. They  call  God  *a  consuming  fire, ''^  a  God  who 'will 
by  no  means  clear  the  guilty.''* 

They  represent  sin  as  '  that  abominable  thing  which  he 
hateth,^  which  he  will  destroy,  as  the  fire  devoureth  the  stub- 
ble, and  the  flame  consumeth  the  chaff.'  As  then  consuming 
fire  cannot  but  burn  and  consume  stubble,  when  applied  to 
it,  so  neither  can  God  do  otherwise  than  punish  sin,  that  abo- 
minable thing,  which  is  consuming  or  destroying  it,  when- 
ever presented  before  him  and  his  justice. 

But  the  very  learned  Twiss  replies,  *  That  God  is  a  con- 
suming fire,  but  an  intelligent  and  rational  one,  not  a  natural 
and  insensible  one ;  and  this,'  says  he, '  is  manifest  from  this, 
that  this  fire  once  burnt  something  not^  consumable,  namely, 
his  own  Son,  in  whom  there  was  no  sin;  which,'  says  he, '  may 
serve  as  a  proof,  that  this  fire  may  not  burn  what  is  con- 
sumable, when  applied  to  it.' 

But,  in  my  opinion,  this  very  learned  man  was  never  more 
unhappy  in  extricating  himself:  for  first,  he  acknowledges 
God  to  be  *  a  consuming  fire,'  though  a  rational  and  intelli- 
gent one,  noT;  a  natural  and  insensible  one  ;  but  the  compa- 
rison was  made  between  the  events  of  the  operations,  not 
the  modes  of  operating.  Nobody  ever  said  that  God  acts 
without  sense,  or  from  absolute  necessity  and  principles  of 
nature,  without  any  concomitant  liberty ;  but  although  he 

•>  Habitude  means  the  state  of  a  person  or  a  tiling,  with  relation  to  something 
else:  the  habitude  of  the  divine  nature  with  respect  to  sin,  is  a  disposition  to  pu- 
nish it. 

<=  Rom.  xii.  29.  Deut.  iv.  24.  Isa.  siii.  13. 

^  Exod.  xxxiv.  7.  e  jg^.  xii  v.  4.   Isa.  v.  24. 

*  The  word  in  the  original  is  '  combustibile,'  meaning  something  that  is  susceptible 
of,  and  consumable  by  fire.  It  must  be  evident  to  every  one  that  the  phrase  is  used 
in  allusion  to  the  metaphor,  which  represents  God  as  a  consuming  fire.  The  Son  of 
God  then  was  not,  strictly  and  properly  speaking,  consumable,  or  susceptible  of  this 
fire  ;  that  is,  he  was  by  no  means  the  object  of  divine  anger,  or  punishment,  consi- 
dered as  the  Son  of  God,  and  without  any  relation  to  mankind  ;  but  on  the  contrary, 
was  the  beloved  of  his  Father,  with  whom  he  was  always  well  pleased  :  but  he  was 
liable  to  the  effect  of  this  fire,  that  is,  of  God's  vindicatory  justice,  as  our  represen- 
tative and  federal  head.  And  every  sinner  is  consumable  by  this  fire,  that  is,  is 
properly  and  naturally  the  object  of  divine  wrath  and  punishment. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        415 

acts  by  will  and  understanding,  we  have  said  that  his  nature 
as  necessarily  requires  him  to  punish  any  sin  committed,  as 
natural  and  insensible  fire  burns  the  combustible  matter  that 
is  applied  to  it.  But  the  learned  gentleman  does  not  deny 
this,  nay,  he  even  confirms  it,  granting  that,  with  respect  to 
sin,  God  '  is  a  consuming  fire,'  though  only  an  intelligent  and 
rational  one. 

I  am  sorry  that  this  very  learned  author  should  have  used 
the  expression,  '  that  this  fire  burnt  something  not  consum- 
able,' when  he  punished  his  most  holy  and  well-beloved 
Son :  for  God  did  not  punish  Christ  as  his  most  holy  Son, 
but  as  our  Mediator,  and  the  surety  of  the  covenant,  '  whom 
he  made  sin  for  us,  though  he  knew  no  sin  ;'  surely,  *  he  laid 
upon  him  our  sins,'  before  '  the  chastisement  of  our  peace 
was  upon  him  :'  but  in  this  sense  he  was  very  susceptible  of 
the  effects  of  this  fire,  viz.  when  considered  as  bearing  the 
guilt  of  all  our  sins,  and  therefore  it  was  that  by  fire  the 
Lord  did  plead  with  him,s  therefore,  what  this  very  learned 
man  asserts,  in  the  third  place,  falls  to  the  ground  ;  for  the 
conclusion  from  such  a  very  false  supposition,  must  neces- 
sarily be  false.     We  go  on  to  the  third  argument. 


CHAP.  VII. 

The  third  argument.  The  non-punishment  of  sin  is  contrary  to  the  glory 
of  God's  justice.  Likewise  of  his  holiness  and  dominion.  A  fourth  argu- 
ment. The  necessity  of  a  satisfaction  being  made  by  the  death  ofVhrist. 
No  necessary  cause,  or  cogent  reason  for  the  death  of  Christ, according 
to  the  adversaries.  The  objection  refuted.  The  use  of  sacrifices.  The  end 
of  the  first  part  of  the  dissertation. 

OuK  third  argument  is  this:  It  is  absolutely  necessary  that 
God  should  preserve  his  glory  entire  to  all  eternity  \  but  sin 
being  supposed,  without  any  punishment  due  to  it,  he  can- 
not preserve  his  glory  free  from  violation ;  therefore,  it  is 
necessary  that  he  should  punish  it.  Concerning  the  major 
proposition,*  there  is  no  dispute  j  for  all  acknowledge,  not 

S  Isa.  Ixvi.  16. 
»  Our  author  here  speaks  in  the  language,  and  reasons  in  the  manner  of  logi- 
cians, the  prevalent  mode  of  reasoning  at  the  time  when  he  wrote  :  for  the  sake  of 
those  unacquainted  with  that  art,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  observe,  that  the  above 
argument  is  what  they  call  a  syllogism  ;  and  that  a  syllogism  consists  of  three  propo- 


41G  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

only  that  it  is  necessaiy  to  God  that  he  should  preserve  his 
glory,  but  that  this  is  incumbent  on  him  by  a  necessity  of 
nature,  for  he  cannot  but  love  himself;  he  is  Jehovah,  and 
will  not  give  his  glory  to  another.''  The  truth  of  the  as- 
sumption is  no  less  clear,  for  the  very  nature  of  the  thing  it- 
self proclaims,  that  the  glory  of  justice,  or  of  holiness  and 
dominion,  could  not  otherwise  be  preserved  and  secured, 
than  by  the  punishment  of  sin. 

Forfirst,  Theglory  of  Godis  displayed  in  doing  the  things 
that  are  just;  but  in  omitting  these,  it  is  impaired,  not  less 
than  in  doing  the  things  that  are  contrary.  '  He  that  justi- 
fieth  the  wicked,  and  he  that  condemneth  the  just,  even  they 
both  are  an  abomination  to  the  Lord.'*'  '  Shall  not  the  judge 
of  all  the  earth  do  right?'  or,  what  is  just?  But  it  is  a  righ- 
teous or  just  thing  with  God  to  recompense  tribulation  to 
the  disobedient,''  and  to  punish  those,  who,  on  account  of 
sin,  are  worthy  of  death.  Suppose,  then,  that  God  should  let 
the  disobedient,  whom  it  is  a  just  thing  for  him  to  punish, 
go  unpunished,  and  that  those  who  are  worthy  of  death 
should  never  be  required  to  die,  but  that  he  should  clear 
the  guilty  and  the  wicked,  although  he  hath  declared  them 
to  be  an  abomination  to  him  ;  where  is  the  glory  of  his  jus- 
tice ?  That  it  is  most  evident,  that  God  thus  punishes,  be- 
cause he  is  just,  we  have  proved  before.  '  Is  God  unrigh- 
teous or  unjust,  who  taketh  vengeance?  God  forbid;  for 
then,  how  shall  God  judge  the  world?'  'And  he  is  righte- 
ous, or  just,  because  he  hath  given  them  blood  to  drink,  who 
were  worthy  of  it  ;''^  and  would  be  so  far  unjust,  were  he 
not  to  inflict  punishment  on  those  deserving  it. 

Secondly,  A  proper  regard  is  not  shewn  to  divine  holi- 
ness, nor  is  its  glory  manifested,  unless  the  punishment  due 
to  sin  be  inflicted.  Holiness  is  opposed  to  sin,  '  for  God  is 
of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  evil,  and  cannot  look  on  ini- 
quity;'^ and  is  the  cause  why  he  cannot  let  sin  pass  unpu- 

sitions:  the  first  is  called  the  major,  the  second  tlic  mii>or,  and  the  third  the  coir- 
clusion.  In  the  above  argument  the  major  proposition  is, '  it  is  absolutely  necessary 
that  God  should  preserve  his  glory  entire  to  ail  eternity.'  The  minor  is,  '  but  sia 
being  supposed,  without  any  punishment  due  to  it,  he  cannot  preserve  his  glory  free 
from  violation.'  Tl.e,  conclusion  is,  '  therefore  it  is  necessary  that  he  should  punish 
it.'  The  minor  is  sometimes  called  the  assumption,  and  sometimes  the  conclusion  is 
so  named.  They  are  both  included  under  this  title  by  our  author  in  the  following 
sentence. 

b  Isa.xlii.  8.  e  Prov.  xvii.  15,  ^  2  Thess.  i.  6.  Rom.  i.  32. 

^  Horn.  iii.  j.  ilev.  xvi,  5—7.  f  Hab.  i.  13. 


A     DISSEllTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  417 

nished,  '  ye  cannot  serve  the  Lord  ;  for  he  is  a  holy  God  : 
he  will  not  forgive  your  transgressions,  nor  your  sins,'s  said 
Joshua  to  the  Israelites.  For  why?  Can  any  thing  impure 
and  polluted  stand  before  his  holy  Majesty  ?  He  himself  de- 
clares the  contrary,  '  that  he  is  not  a  God  that  hath  pleasure 
in  wickedness;'  that,  'evil  shall  not  dwell  with  him;'  that 
*  the  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  his  sight ;'  that  *  he  hateth  all 
the  workers  of  iniquity.'  And  that,  *  there  shall  in  no  wise 
enter  into  the  New  Jerusalem,  any  thing  that  defileth,  neither 
whatsoever  worketh  abomination  or  maketh  a  lie.'^  Nor  can 
Jesus  Christ  present  his  church  to  his  Father,'  till  it  be  sanc- 
tified and  cleansed,  with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  word, 
and  made  a  glorious  church,  not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or 
any  such  thing  ;  but  holy,  and  without  blemish.''  And  we 
are  enjoined  to  be  holy,  because  he  is  holy.  '  But  all  things 
are  to  be  purged  with  blood,  and  without  shedding  of  blood, 
there  is  no  remission."" 

Thirdly,  We  have  sufficiently  shewn  above,  that  the  na- 
tural dominion  which  God  hath  over  rational  creatures,  and 
which,  they  by  sin  renounce,  could  not  otherwise  be  preserv- 
ed, or  continued,  than  by  means  of  a  vicarious  punishment. 
And  now  let  impartial  judges  decide,  whether  it  be  necessary 
to  God,  that  he  should  preserve  entire  the  glory  of  his  jus- 
tice, holiness,  and  supreme  dominion,  or  not? 

Fourthly,  And  which  is  a  principal  point  to  be  considered 
on  this  subject,  were  the  opinions  of  the  adversaries  to  be 
admitted,  and  were  we  to  suppose  that  God  might  will  the 
salvation  of  any  sinner,  it  will  be  difficult,  if  not  impossible, 
to  assign  any  sufficient  and  necessary  cause  of  the  death  of 
Christ.  For,  let  us  suppose  that  God  hath  imposed  on  man- 
kind a  law,  ratified  by  a  threatening  of  eternal  death  ;  and 
that  they,  by  a  violation  of  that  law,  have  deserved  the  pu- 
nishment threatened,  and  consequently  are  become  liable  to 
eternal  death.  Again,  Let  us  suppose,  that  God  in  that 
threatening,  did  not  expressly  intend  the  death  of  the  sin- 
ner ;  but  afterward  declared  what,  and  of  what  kind  he  willed 
that  the  guilt  of  sin  should  be,  and  what  punishment  he 
might  justly  inflict  on  the  sinner,  and  what  the  sinner  him- 
self ought  to  expect  (all  which  things  flow  from  the  free  de- 
termination of  God),  but  that  he  might  by  his  nod,  word, 

B  Josh.  xxiv.  9.    '>Psal.\'.4— 6.  Rcv.xxi.  27.      '  Eph.  v.  26,  27.      "^  Hcb.  ix.  22. 


418        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

without  any  trouble,  though  no  satisfaction  were  either  made, 
or  received,  without  the  least  diminution  of  his  glory,  and 
without  any  affront  or  dishonour  to  any  attribute,  or  any  in- 
jury or  disgrace  to  himself,  consistent  with  the  preservation 
of  his  right,  dominion,  and  justice,  freely  pardon  the  sins  of 
those  whom  he  might  will  to  save ;  what  sufficient  reason 
could  be  given,  pray  then,  why  he  should  lay  those  sins  so 
easily  remissible  to  the  charge  of  his  most  holy  Son,  and  on 
their  account  subject  him  to  such  dreadful  sufferings? 

While  Socinians  do  not  acknowledge  other  ends  of  the 
whole  of  this  dispensation  and  mystery,  than  those  which 
they  assign,  they  will  be  unable,  to  all  eternity,  to  give  any 
probable  reason,  why  a  most  merciful  and  just  God  should 
expose  a  most  innocent  and  holy  man,  who  was  his  own 
Son,  by  way  of  eminence,  and  who  was  introduced  by  him- 
self into  the  world  in  a  preternatural  manner,  as  they  them- 
selves acknowledge,  to  afflictions  and  sufferings  of  every 
kind,  while  among  the  living  he  pointed  out  to  them  the  way 
of  life ;  and  at  last  to  a  cruel,  ignominious,  and  accursed  death. 

I  very  well  know  that  I  cannot  pretend  to  be  either  in- 
genious or  quick-sighted ;  but  respecting  this  matter,  I  am 
not  ashamed  to  confess  my  dulness  to  be  such,  that  I  cannot 
see  that  God,  consistent  with  the  preservation  of  his  right 
and  glory  entire,  could,  without  the  intervention  of  a  ransom, 
pardon  sins,  as  if  justice  did  not  require  their  punishment, 
or  that  Christ  had  died  in  vain.  For  why?  Hath  not  God 
set  him  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  for  the  demonstration,  or 
declaration  of  his  sin-punishing  justice?  But  how  could 
that  justice  be  demonstrated  by  an  action  which  it  did  not 
require  ?  or,  if  the  action  might  be  omitted  without  any  di- 
minution of  it?  If  God  would  have  been  infinitely  just  to 
eternity,  nor  would  have  done  any  thing  contrary  and  of- 
fensive to  justice,  though  he  had  never  inflicted  punishment 
upon  any  sin  ?  Could  any  ruler  become  highly  famed  and 
celebrated  on  account  of  his  justice,  by  doing  those  things, 
which,  from  the  right  of  his  dominion,  he  can  do  without  in- 
justice, but  to  the  performance  of  which  he  is  no  way  obli- 
gated by  the  virtue  of  justice  ?  But  if  the  adversaries  sup- 
pose, that,  when  God  freely  made  a  law  for  his  rational  crea- 
tures, he  freely  appointed  a  punishment  for  transgression, 
freely  substituted  Christ  in  the   room  of  transgressors  :  in 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        419 

fine,  that  God  did  all  these  things,  and  the  like,  because  so 
it  pleased  him,  and  that  therefore  we  are  to  acquiesce  in  that 
most  wise  and  free-will  of  his  disposing  all  things  at  his 
pleasure ;  they  should  not  find  me  opposing  them ;  unless 
God  himself  had  taught  us  in  his  word, '  that  sin  is  that  abo- 
minable thing  which  his  soul  hateth,'  which  is  affrontive  to 
him,  which  entirely  casteth  off  all  regard  to  that  glo^y,  ho- 
nour, and  reverence,  which  are  due  to  him :  and  that  to  the 
sinner  himself,  it  is  something  evil  and  bitter,  '  for  he  shall 
eat  of  the  fruit  of  his  doings,  and  be  filled  with  his  own  coun- 
sels ;'  and  that  God,  with  respect  to  sinners,  is  a  *  consuming 
fire,'  an  everlasting  burning,  in  which  they  shall  dwell ;  that 
'  he  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty,'  that  he  judgeth^those 
who  are  worthy  of  death,  and  by  his  just  judgment  taketh 
vengeance  on  them  ;  and  that,  therefore, '  without  the  shed- 
ding of  blood,  there  can  be  no  remission  ;'  and  that  without 
a  victim  for  sin,  there  remaineth  to  sinners,  'nothing  but  a 
fearful  looking  for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indignation,  that 
shall  consume  the  adversaries ;'  and  that  he  had  appointed 
from  the  beginning,  his  only-begotten  Son,  for  the  declaration 
and  satisfaction  of  his  justice,  and  the  recovery  of  his  glory, 
to  open  the  way  to  heaven,  otherwise  shut,  and  to  remain 
shut  for  ever  :  if,  I  say,  God  had  not  instructed  us  in  these 
and  such-like  truths  from  his  word,  I  should  not  oppose 
them:  but  these  being  clearly  laid  down  in  the  word,  we 
solemnly  declare  our  belief,  that  no  sinner  could  obtain  the 
remission  of  his  sins,  provided  that  we  are  disposed  to  ac- 
knowledge God  to  be  just,  without  ^a  price  of  redemption. 

Perhaps,  some  one  will  say,  it  doth  not  follow  from  the 
death  of  Christ,  that  God  necessarily  punisheth  sin,  for 
Christ  himself,  in  his  agony,  placeth  the  passing  away  of 
the  cup  among  things  possible.  *  All  things,'  saith  he, 
'  Father,  are  possible  with  thee.     Let  this  cup  pass  from  me.* 

I  answer,  it  is  well  known,  that  the  word  *  impossibility* 
may  be  considered  in  a  twofold  point  of  view  :  the  first  is 
in  itself  absolute,  which  respects  the  absolute  power  of  God, 
antecedent  to  any  free  act  of  the  divine  will :  in  this  respect, 
it  was  not  impossible  that,  that  cup  should  pass  from  Christ. 
The  second  is  conditional,  which  respects  the  power  of  God, 
as  directed  in  a  certain  order,  that  is  determined,  and  (if  I 

'  Or  ransom. 


420        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

might  so  phrase  it)  circumscribed  by  some  act  of  the  divine 
will ;  and  in  this  sense  it  was  impossible  :  that  is  to  say,  it 
being  supposed,  that  God  willed  to  pardon  any  sins  to  sin- 
ners, it  could  not  be  done  without  laying  their  punishment 
upon  the  surety  ;  but  we  do  not  pursue  this  argument  farther 
at  present,  because  we  intend  to  resume  it  again  in  the  con- 
sideration of  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  satisfaction. 

There  ar«  yet  many  arguments  very  proper  for  establish- 
ing the  truth  on  our  side  of  the  question,  which  we  choose 
not  to  enter  on  largely  and  on  set  purpose,  lest  we  should 
be  tiresome  to  the  reader;  perhaps,  however,  it  will  be 
judged  worth  while  briefly  to  sketch  out  some  heads  of  them, 
and  annex  them  to  the  former  arguments  concerning  justice 
and  the  exercise  thereof.    The  first  is  to  this  purport : 

A  second  act  presupposes  a  first ;  and  a  constant  manner 
of  operating  proves  a  habit.  A  sign  also  expresses  the 
thing  signified.  Because  God  doetli  good  to  all,  we  believe 
him  to  be  good  and  endowed  with  supreme  goodness.  For 
how  could  he  so  constantly  and  uniformly  do  good,  unless 
he  himself  were  good  ?  Yea,  from  second  acts  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures sometimes  teach  the  first;  as  for  instance,  that  God 
is  the  living  God,  because  he  giveth  life  to  all ;  that  he  is 
good,  because  he  doeth  good  :  why  may  we  not  also  say, 
and  that  he  is  just,  endowed  with  that  justice  of  which  we 
are  treating,  because  '  God  perverteth  not  judgment;  neither 
doth  the  Almighty  pervert  justice;'  but  '  the  Lord  is  righ- 
teous, and  upright  are  his  judgments.'™  A  constant,  then,  and 
uniform  course  of  just  operation  in  punishing  sin,  proves 
punitory  justice  to  be  essentially  inherent  in  God.  From 
his  law,  which  is  the  sign"  of  the  divine  will,  the  same  is 
evident.  For  the  nature  of  the  thing  signified  is,  that  it 
resembles  the  sign  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  expressing 
it.  That  the  same  thing  may  be  said  of  the  anger,  fury,  and 
severity  of  God  hath  been  shewn  above ;  Rom.  i.  8. 

A  second.  It  is  not  the  part  of  a  just  judge,  of  his  mere 
good  pleasure,  to  let  the  wicked  pass  unpunished  :  *  he  that 
justifieth  the  wicked  is  an  abomination  to  the  Lord,'  and 
'woe  to  them  that  call  evil  good.'  But  God  is  a  just  judge  : 
*  but  one,  who  is  not  liable  to  render  a  reason,'  you  will  say, 

"'  Job  viii.  3.     Psal.  cxix.  137. 
"  That  is,  which  slicwcth  what  the  divine  will  is. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        421 

and  '  who  is  by  no  means  subject  to  a  law.'  But  the  nature 
of  God  is  a  law  to  itself:  he  cannot  lie,  because  he  himself 
is  truth  ;  nor  act  unjustly,  because  he  is  just.  Such  as  God 
is  by  nature,  such  is  he  in  the  acts  of  his  will. 

A  third.  The  argument,  from,  the  immutable  difference 
of  things  in  themselves,  is  of  very  considerable  weight.  For 
that  which  is  sin,  because  it  destroys  that  subjection  of  the 
creature  which  is  due  to  the  Creator,  cannot  even,  by  the 
omnipotence  of  God,  be  made  to  be  not  sin.  To  hate  the 
supreme  good  implies  a  contradiction.  But  if  from  the  na- 
ture of  the  thing,  sin  be  sin,  in  relation  to  the  supreme  per- 
fection of  God,  from  the  nature  of  the  thing  too  it  is  its  own 
punishment.  Yea,  God  hath  ordered  children  to  obey  their 
parents,  because  this  is  right." 

A  fourth.  The  adversaries  acknowledge,  '  that  God  can- 
not save  the  impenitent  and  obstinately  wicked,  without  in- 
jury to  the  glory,  and  holiness,  and  perfection,  of  his  nature.' 
Wliy  so?  'The  justice  of  God,'  say  they,  'will  not  suffer  it.' 
But  what  kind  of  justice  is  that,  I  ask,  which  can  regard  cer- 
tain modes  and  relations  of  ti-ansgression  or  sin,  and  will 
not  regard  the  transgression  or  sin  itself? 

A  fifth,  God  punishes  sin  either  because  he  simply  wills 
it,  or  because  it  is  just  that  sin  should  be  punished.  If  be- 
cause he  simply  wills  it,  then  the  will  of  God  is  the  alone 
cause  of  the  perdition  of  a  sinful  creature.  But  he  himself 
testifies  to  the  contrary,  viz.  that  man's  ruin  is  of  himself; 
*0  Israel^  thou  hast  destroyed  thyself;  but  in  me  is  thy 
help.'  Again,  justice  does  not  require  that  the  things  which 
God  doeth  of  his  mere  good  pleasure  should  come  to  pass, 
more,  than  that  they  should  not  come  to  pass.  But  if  it  be 
not  more  just  that  sins  should  be  punished,  than  that  they 
should  not  be  punished,  it  is  certain  that  the  non-punish- 
ment or  free  pardon  of  sin  is  more  agreeable  to  the  goodness, 
grace,  love,  and  compassion  of  God,  than  the  infliction  of 
punishment ;  how  then  comes  it  to  pass,  that  disregarding 
these  attributes,  he  should  freely  will  that  which  no  essen- 
tial property  of  his  nature  requires  ?  If  then  sin  be  sin,  be- 
cause God  wills  it;  if  the  transgression  of  the  law  deserve 
punishment  because  God  wills  it;  and  the  punishment  be  at 
Length  inflicted  because  God  wills  it;  the  order  of  things, 

o  In  tlie  original,  just.  i'  Hos.  xiii.  9. 


422         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

or  the  condition  which  they  are  in  by  virtue  of  their  respect 
and  relation  to  the  dominion  and  perfection  of  God,  re- 
quiring no  such  thing,  why  pray,  should  we  either  hate  or 
abhor  sin,  when  the  bare  will  of  God  alone  is  to  be  consi- 
dered, both  in  respect  of  the  decree  which  supposes  that 
there  is  nothing  in  sin,  and  which  implies  no  change  of  the 
state  of  things,  and  also  in  respect  of  its  execution  ?  But  if 
God  punish  sin,  because,  by  virtue  of  his  natural  justice  it  is 
just  that  it  should  be  punished,  then  it  is  unjust  not  to  pu- 
nish it.     But  is  God  unjust?  God  forbid. 

I  am  truly  ashamed  of  those  divines,  who  have  nothing 
more  commonly  in  their  mouths,  both  in  their  disputations 
and  discourses  to  the  people,  than  '  that  God  might  by  other 
means  have  provided  for  the  safety  and  honour  of  his  jus- 
tice, but  that,  that  way  by  the  blood  of  his  Son  was  more 
proper  and  becoming.'     So  said  Augustine  of  old  :  but  what 
then  ?    Of  that  absolute  power,  which  they  dream  of,  by 
which  he  might,  without  any  intervening  sacrifice,  forgive 
sins,  not  the  least  syllable  is  mentioned  in  the  whole  sacred 
writings :  nor  am  I  afraid  to  affirm  that  a  more  convenient 
device  to  weaken  our  faith,  love,  and  gratitude,  cannot  be  in- 
vented.     Away,  then,  with  such  speculations  which  teach 
that  the  mystery  of  the  love  of  God  the  Father,  of  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ,  of  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  either 
indifferent,  or  at  least  were  not  necessary  for  procuring  and 
bestowing  salvation  and  eternal  glory  on  miserable  sinners. 
But  it  is  manifest,  that  by  such  artifices  Socinians  endeavour 
to  overthrow  the  whole  healing  and  heavenly  doctrine  of 
the  gospel :  '  My  soul,  come  not  thou  into  their  secret.'  But 
that  God  should  institute  so  many  expiatory  typical  sacri- 
fices, and  attended  with  so  great  labour  and  cost,  with  a 
sanction  of  severe  punishments  upon  delinquents,  with  this 
view  only  to  communicate  instruction,  and  to  serve  to  lead 
us  to  Christ,  though  they  could  in  no  wise  take  away  the 
guilt  of  sin  :^  that  he  should  appoint  his  own  Son,  not  only 
to  death,  but  to  a  bloody,  ignominious,  accursed  death,  to 
be  inflicted  with  such  shame  and  disgrace  as  hath  not  been 
purged  away  through  so  many  generations  that  have  passed 
since  that  death,  even  to  the  present  time ;  that  Jehovah 

•■  Heb.  X.  1.  There  the  apostle  argues  for  the  necessity  of  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ,  which  he  could  not,  if  the  guilt  of  sin  could  have  been  taken  away  by  any 
other  way  whatever. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        4  23 

himself  should  have  been  pleased  to  bruise  him,  to  put  him 
to  grief;  that  he  made  his  own  sword  to  awake  against  him, 
and  forsook  him  f  that  God,  I  say,  should  have  done  these 
and  such  like'  things,  without  being  induced  to  it  by  any 
necessary  cause,  let  those  who  can,  comprehend  and  ex- 
plain. 


PART  II. 
CHAP.   VIII. 

Objections  of  the  adversaries  answered.  The  Racoviun  catechism  particu- 
larly considered.  The  force  of  the  argument  for  the  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
from  punitory  justice.  The  catcchists  deny  that  justice  to  be  inherent  m 
God.  And  also  sparing  mercy.  Their  first  argument  weighed  and  re- 
futed. Justice  and  7nercy  are  not  opposite.  Two  kinds  of  the  divine  at- 
tributes.    Their  second  and  third  arguments,  with  the  answers  annexed. 

It  is  now  time  to  meet  the  objections  of  the  adversaries, 
and  so  at  length  put  an  end  to  this  dispute,  as  far  as  regards 
the  subject  matter  of  it,  already  drawn  out  to  such  a  length, 
and  yet  farther  to  be  continued.  We  must  first  then  en- 
counter the  Socinians  themselves,  on  whose  account  we  first 
engaged  in  this  undertaking  ;  and  afterward  we  shall  com- 
pare notes  with  a  few  learned  friends.  But  as  Very  lately 
the  Kacovian  catechism  of  these  heretics  hath  been  repeat- 
edly printed  among  us,  we  shall  first  consider  what  is  to  be 
met  with  there  in  opposition  to  the  truth  which  we  assert. 

The  Socinians  grant  in  that  catechism  of  theirs,  the  ar- 
gument for  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  drawn  from  the  nature 
of  this  punitory  justice  'to  be  plausible  in  appearance  ;'  yea, 
they  must  necessarily  acknowledge  it  to  be  such  as  that 
they  cannot  even  in  appearance  oppose  it,  without  being 
guilty  of  the  dreadful  sacrilege  of  robbing  God  of  his  essen- 
tial attributes;  and  therefore  they  deny  either  this  justice 
or  sparing  mercy  to  be  naturally  inherent  in  God  ;  and  they 
endeavour  to  defend  the  robbery  by  a  three-fold  argument. 
Their  first  is  this :  *  as  to  mercy,  that  it  is  not  inherent  in 

'  See  Isa.  liii.  10. 
'This  treatise  was  published  in  Latin,  in  tiie  year  1653. 


424  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

God  in  the  manner  that  they  think^b  is  evident  from  this 
consideration,  that  if  it  were  naturally  inherent  in  God,  God 
would  not  wholly  punish  any  sin ;  as  in  like  manrrer,  if  that 
justice  were  naturally  inherent  in  God,  as  they  think,  God 
could  forgive  no  sin  :  for  God  can  never  do  any  thing 
against  what  is  naturally  inherent  in  him.  As  for  instance, 
as  wisdom  is  naturally  inherent  in  God,  God  never  doeth 
any  thing  contrary  to  it,  but  whatsoever  he  doeth,  he  doeth 
all  things  wisely.  But  as  it  is  manifest  that  God  forgives 
and  punishes  sins  when  he  will,  it  appears,  that  such  a  kind 
of  mercy  and  justice  as  they  think  of,  is  not  naturally  inhe- 
rent in  God,  but  is  the  effect  of  his  own  will.' 

I  answer  first,  that  we  have  laid  it  down  as  a  fixed  prin- 
ciple that  mercy  is  essential  to  God,  and  that  the  nature  of 
it  in  God  is  the  same  with  justice  we  willingly  grant.  Ru- 
therford alone  hath  asserted  that  mercy  is  essential  to  God, 
but  that  this  justice  is  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will.  The 
falsity  and  folly  of  his  assertion,  let  himself  be  answerable 
for  ;  the  thing  speaks  for  itself.  To  speak  the  truth,  justice 
is  attributed  to  God  properly  and  by  way  of  habit,  mercy 
only  analogically  and  by  way  of  affection ;  and  in  the  first 
covenant  God  paved  no  way  for  the  display  of  his  mercy, 
but  proceeded  in  that  which  led  straight  to  the  glory  of  his 
justice;  nevertheless  we  maintain  the  one  to  be  no  less  na- 
turally inherent  in  God  than  the  other.  '  But  if  it  were  na- 
turally inherent  in  God,'  say  the  catechists,  '  God  would  not 
punish  any  sin.'  Why?  I  say;  mention  some  plea.  '  Be- 
cause,' say  they,  'God  cannot  do  any  thing  contrary  to  what 
is  naturally  inherent  in  him ;  but  it  is  manifest  that  God 
punishes  sin.'  But  whose  sins  doth  God  punish?  The  sins 
of  the  impenitent,  the  unbelieving,  the  rebellious,  for  whose 
offences  the  justice  of  God  hath  never  been  satisfied.  But, 
is  not  this  contrary  to  mercy?  Let  every  just  judge  then 
be  called  cruel ;  the  punishment  of  sin  then  is  contrary  to 
mercy,  either  in  respect  of  the  infliction  of  the  punishment 
itself,  or  because  it  supposes  in  God  a  quality  opposite  to 
mercy  ;  the  contrariety  is  not  in  respect  of  the  infliction  of 
punishment ;  for  between  an  external  act  of  divine  power 
and  eternal   attributes  of  Deity,  no  opposition  can  be  sup- 

^  Let  the  reader  remember  that  the  compilers  of  the  Racovian  catechism  are  now 
speaking,  and  that  the  words  'they  think'  allude  to  the  sentiments  of  the  orthodox. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  425 

posed  ;  nor  can  it  be,  because  punishment  supposes  some 
quality  in  God  opposite  to  mercy,  for  that  which  is  oppo- 
site to  mercy  is  cruelty;  but  God  is  free  from  every  suspi- 
cion of  cruelty,  yet  he  punishes  the  sins  of  the  impenitent, 
as  the  Socinians  themselves  acknowledge. 

But  that  punitory  justice,  say  they,  which  you  assign  as 
the  source  of  punishment,  is  opposite  to  mercy.  How,  I  say, 
can  that  be  ?  Punitory  justice,  essentially  considered,  is  the 
very  perfection  and  rectitude  of  God  itself,  essentially  con- 
sidered ;  and  the  essence  of  mercy,  so  to  speak,  is  the  same. 
But  the  essei>ce  of  God,  which  is  most  simple,  is  not  op- 
posed to  itself;  moreover,  both  have  their  actual  egresses 
by  means  of  the  acts  of  the  divine  will,  which  is  always  one 
alone  and  self-consistent.  Objectively  considered,  I  ac- 
knowledge they  have  different,  but  not  contrary,  effects  ;  for 
to  punish  the  impenitent  guilty,  for  whom  no  satisfaction 
hath  been  made,  is  not  contrary  to  the  pardoning  of  those 
who  believe  and  are  penitent,  through  the  blood  of  the  Me- 
diator, which  was  shed  for  the  remission  of  sins.  In  one 
word,  it  is  not  necessary,  that,  though  actions  be  contrary, 
the  essential  principles  should  also  be  contrary. 

But  they  again  urge,  '  Wisdom  is  naturally  inherent  in 
God,  and  he  never  doeth  any  thing  contrary  to  it ;  for  what- 
soever he  doeth,  he  doeth  all  things  wisely.'  We  answer. 
It  hath  been  proved  before  that  the  punishment  of  sin  is 
not  contrary  to  mercy.  But  they  urge  something  farther, 
and  insinuate  that  God  not  only  cannot  act  contrary  to  his 
wisdom,  but  that  in  every  work  he  exerciseth  it ;  '  whatsoever 
he  doeth,'  say  they, '  he  doeth  wisely.'  But  the  nature  of  all 
the  divine  attributes,  in  respect  of  their  exercise,  is  not  the 
same ;  for  some  create  and  constitute  an  object  to  them- 
selves, as  power  and  wisdom,  which  God  must  necessarily 
exercise  in  all  his  works ;  some  require  an  object  consti- 
tuted for  their  egress ;  and  for  these  it  is  sufficient,  that  no 
work  be  done  that  is  opposite,  or  derogatory  to  their  honour; 
of  this  kind  are  mercy  and  justice,  as  was  said  before. 

Thus  far  concerning  mercy. 

The  objections  that  they  bring  against  justice  are  easily 
answered  :  '  If  justice  be  naturally  inherent  in  God,' say  they, 
'  then  he  could  let  no  sin  pass  unpunished.'  We  readily 
grant  that  God  passes  by  no  sin  unpunished,  nor  can  do  it. 

VOL.    IX.  2    F 


426         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

He  forgives  our  sins,  but  he  doth  not  absolutely  let  them 
pass  unpunished;  every  sin  hath  its  just  recompense  of  re- 
ward, either  in  the  sinner,  or  the  surety  ;  but  to  pardon  sin 
for  which  jusuce  hath  been  satisfied,  is  nowise  contrary  to 
justice;  that  the  nature  of  justice  and  mercy,  in  respect  of 
their  relation  to  their  object,  is  different,  hath  been  shewn 
before.  Such  is  their  first  argument ;  the  second  follows, 
which  is  this  : 

'That  justice  which  the  adversaries  oppose  to  mercy,' 
say  they,  'whereby  God  punisheth  sins,  the  sacred  Scriptures 
nowhere  point  out  by  the  name  of  justice,  but  call  it  the 
anger  and  fury  of  God.'  We  answer,  in  the  first  place,  that 
it  is  a  very  gross  mistake,  that  we  oppose  justice  to  mercy. 
These  catechists  have  need  themselves  to  be  catechized. 

In  the  second  place  ;  Let  those,  who  shall  please  to  con- 
sult the  passages  formerly  mentioned  and  explained  on  this 
head,  determine,  whether  the  Sacred  Scriptures  call  this 
justice*  by  its  own  proper  name  or  not?  In  the  third  place  ; 
Anger  or  fury  are,  in  reality,  as  to  their  effects,  reducible  to 
justice;  hence  that  which  is  called  'wrath'  or  'anger'  in 
Rom.  i.  18.  in  the  thirty-first  verse  is  called 'judgment.''' 
Such  is  their  second,  and  now  follows  the  third  argument. 

'When  God  forgives  sins,  it  is  attributed  in  Scripture  to 
his  justice.  '^If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just 
to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  iniquity. 
Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through  the  redemption 
that  is  in  Jesus  Christ,  whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  pro- 
pitiation through  faith  in  his  blood,  to  declare  his  righte- 
ousness for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past,  through  the 
forbearance  of  God ;  to  declare,  I  say,  at  this  time  his  righ- 
teousness; that  he  might  be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  him 
that  believeth  in  Jesus.'  We  answer  ;  that  we  have  already 
shewn,  at  great  length,  that  justice,  universally  taken,  is  the 
perfection  and  rectitude  of  God,  and  has  various  egresses 
both  in  words  and  in  deeds,  according  to  the  constitution 
of  the  objects  about  which  it  may  be  employed  :  hence  ef- 
fects distinct  and  in  some  measure  different,  are  attributed 
to  the  same  virtue.  But  the  justice,  on  account  of  which, 
God  is  said  to  forgive  sins,  is  the  justice  of  faithfulness, 

»  This  point  is  treated,  at  great  length,  and  clearly  proved  in  'tlie  third  chapter. 
^  Theoriginal  word  means  a  just  sentence,  or  righteous  judgment. 
<=  1  John  i.  9.  Rora.  iii.  24—26. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       427 

which  has  the  foundation  of  its  exercise  in  this  punitory 
justice,  to  which,  when  satisfied,  God,  who  cannot  lie,  pro- 
mises the  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Jesus  Christ,  which 
promise  beyond  all  doubt  he  will  perform,  because  he  is 
faithful  and  just.  And  thus  vanishes  in  smoke  all  that 
these  unhappy  catechists  have  scraped  together  against  this 
divine  truth. 


CHAP.  IX. 

Crellius  taken  to  task.  His  first  mistake.  God  doth  not  punish  sins  as  behig 
endowed  with  supreme  dominioti.  The  first  argument  of  Crellius.  The 
answer.  The  translation  of  punishment  upon  Christ,  in  what  view  made 
by  God.  Whether  the  remission  of  sins,  without  a  satisfaction  made,  could 
take  place,  without  injury  to  him  to  whom  punishment  belongs.  Whether 
every  one  can  resign  his  right.  Right  twofold.  The  right  of  debt,  what: 
and  what  that  of  government.  A  natural  and  positive  right.  Positive 
right,  what:  a  description  also  of  natural  right.    Concessions  of  Crellius. 

Crellius  treats  this  subject  at  great  length,  and  with 
his  usual  artifice  and  acuteness,  in  his  first  book  '  of  the  true 
Religion,'  prefixed  to  the  works  of  Volkelius,  on  the  same 
subject." 

First,  then,  he  asserts,  '  That  God  hath  a  power  of  in- 
flicting and  of  not  inflicting  punishment ;  but  that  it  is  by 
no  means  repugnant  to  divine  justice,  to  pardon  the  sinner 
whom  by  his  right  he  might  punish.' 

But  here  Crellius,  which  is  a  bad  omen,  as  they  say, 
stumbles  in  the  very  threshold ;  supposing  punishment  to 
be  competent  to  God,  as  he  hath,  oris  endowed  with  an  ab- 
solute and  supreme  dominion  over  the  creatures.  God  never 
punisheth,  or  is  said  to  punish,  as  using  that  power  :  it 
is  the  part  of  a  governor  or  judge  to  inflict  punishment, 
and  the  Scriptures  furnish  sufficient  evidence  that  both 
these  relations  belong  to  him  in  the  infliction  of  punish- 
ment. ^'  There  is  one  Lawgiver,  who  is  able  to  save  and  to 
destroy.  He  raaintaineth  right,  and  sitteth  on  his  throne 
judging  right.  He  is  Judge  of  all  the  earth.  He  is  the 
supreme    Judge.     He    hath  prepared   his   throne  for  judg- 

•1  Chap,  xxiii.  title, '  Of  the  Power  of  God  ;'  p.  181,  &c. 
•>  James  iv,  12.  Psal.  ix.  4,  5.  Gen.  xviii.  2:5.  Psal.  1.  6.  ix.  8,  9.  xciv.  2.   Heb. 
xii.  23,  &c. 

2  F  2 


428        A     DISSERTATION    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

ment,  and  he  shall  judge  the  world  in  righteousness :  he  shall 
minister  judgment  to  the  people  in  righteousness.     He  is 
Judge  of  the  earth,  who  will  render  a  reward  to  the  proud. 
He  is  Jehovah,  our  Judge,  our  Lawgiver,  and  our  King.  And 
God  the  Judge  of  all.'     In  all  the  acts  of  his  absolute  do- 
minion and  supreme  power,  God  is  most  free,  and  this  the 
apostle  openly  asserts  with  regard  to  his  decrees  making  dis- 
tinctions among  mankind,  in  respect  of  their  last  end,  and 
the  means  thereto  conducing,  according  to  his  mere   good 
pleasure  ;  see  Rom.  ix.     Moreover,  in  some  operations  and 
dispensations  of  providence  concerning  mankind,  both  the 
godly  and  ungodly,  I  acknowledge,  that  God  frequently  as- 
serts the  equity  and  rectitude  of  his  government,  from  that 
supreme  right  which  he  possesseth,  and  may  exercise. 

*^ '  Behold, — God  is  greater  than  man.  Why  dost  thou 
strive  against  him;  for  he  giveth  not  an  account  of  any  of 
his  matters.'  'Yea,  surely,  God  will  not  do  wickedly,  neither 
will  the  Almighty  pervert  judgment.  Who  hath  given  him 
a  charge  over  the  earth  ?  or,  who  hath  disposed  the  whole 
world?  if  he  set  his  heart  upon  man,  if  he  gather  to  himself 
his  spirit  and  his  breath ;  all  flesh  shall  perish  together,  and 
man  shall  return  again  unto  dust.' 

But  that  God  punishes  omissions,  and  avenges  trans- 
gressions, as  the  supreme  ''Lord  of  all,  and  not  as  a  Ruler  of 
the  universe  and  Judge  of  the  world,  is  an  opinion  supported 
by  no  probable  reason,  and  by  no  testimony  of  Scripture. 
But  let  us  hear  what  Crellius  himself  has  to  say.  He  thus 
proceeds  : 

'  He  injures  none,  whether  he  punish  or  do  not  punish  ; 
if  so  be  that  the  question  is  only  respecting  his  right :  for 
the  punishment  is  not  owing  to  the  offending  person,  but  he 
owes  it;  and  he  owes  it  to  him  upon  whom  the  whole  injury 
will  ultimately  redound,  who  in  this  matter  is  God ;  but  if 
you  consider  the  matter  in  itself,  every  one  has  it  in  his 

<^  Job  xxxiii.  12,  13. 
^  As  supreme  Lord  of  the  universe,  he  exerciseth  an  uncontrolled  dominion,  dohig 
'  in  the  armies  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  whatsoever  seem- 
eth  good  unto  him.'  But  as  the  Ruler  and  Judge  of  the  world,  he  distributeth  im- 
partial justice, '  giving  to  every  one  according  to  his  works.'  The  force  of  this  argu- 
ment then  is  tJiis,  tliatin  viewing  God,  as  punishing  sin,  we  are  not  to  consider  him 
as  supreme  Lord,  who  may  exercise  an  absolute  and  uncontrolled  will ;  but  as  a 
righteous  Judge,  bound  by  a  law  to  administer  justice,  and  by  a  law  founded  in  his 
nature,  necessarily  requiring  him  so  to  do. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        429 

power  to  prosecute  his  right,  and  likewise  not  to  prosecute 
it,  or  to  yield  up  of  it  as  much  as  he  pleases  :  for  this  is  the 
nature  of  a  proper  and  sovereign  right. 

A71S.  It  is  easy  to  be  seen,  that  the  former  fallacy  diffuses 
its  fibres  through  the  whole  of  this  reasoning.  For  the  right, 
a  dispensation  with  which  he  maintains  to  be  lawful,  he  af- 
firms to  be  a  sovereign  right,  or  the  right  of  a  lord  and.master  ; 
but  this  right  is  not  the  subject  in  question.  It  is  a  ruler  and 
judge  to  whom  punishmentbelongs,  and  who  repays  it;  I  would 
not,  indeed,  deny  that  God's  supreme  and  sovereign  right 
has  a  place  in  the  matter  of  the  satisfaction  made  by  Christ 
in  our  stead  :  for  although  to  inflict  punishment  be  the  oflSce 
of  a  ruler  and  judge,*  yet  the  very  translation  of  guilt  from 
us  upon  Christ,  constituting  him  sin  for  us,  is  a  most  free 
act,  and  an  act  of  supreme  power ;  unless,  perhaps,  the  ac- 
ceptance of  the  promise  made  by  the  surety,  belong  of  right 
to  him  as  ruler,  and  there  be  no  other  act  to  be  assigned 
to  God. 

But  let  us  consider  these  arguments  of  Crellius  severally. 

*  He  injures  no  one,'  says  he,  'whether  he  punish  or  not:'  but 
an  omission  of  the  infliction  of  punishment,  where  it  is  due, 
cannot  take  place  without  injury  to  that  justice  on  which  it 
is  incumbent  to  inflict  the  punishment.  '  For  he  that  jus- 
tifieth  the  wicked,  is  an  abomination  to  the  Lord.'*"  And  a 
heavy  woe  is  pronounced  on  them  '  that  call  evil  good,  and 
good  evil.'  It  is  true,  that  God  neither  injures  nor  can  in- 
jure any  one,  either  in  what  he  hath  done,  or  might  do  : 

*  for  who  hath  first  given  to  him,  and  it  shall  be  restored  to 
him  again.'  Nor  is  it  less  true,  that  he  will  not,  yea,  that 
he  cannot  do  injury  to  his  own  justice,  which  requireth  the 
punishment  of  every  sin.  An  earthly  judge  may  oftentimes 
spare  a  guilty  person  without  injury  to  another,  but  not 
without  injustice  in  himself;  yea,  Crellius  asserts,  that  God 
cannot  forgive  the  sins  of  some  sinners  ;  namely,  the  contu- 
macious, without  injury  to  himself;  for  this,  as  he  says, 
would  be  unworthy  of  God.  But  we  are  sure,  that  every  sin, 
without  exception,  setting  aside  the  consideration  of  the  re- 

<^  That  botli  these  relations,  viz.  of  a  Ruler  and  Judge,  are  (o  be  assigned  to  God 
the  Scriptures  anipl;^'  testify.     Sec  p.  41,  &lc. 

f  Prov.  xvii.  15.  Isa.  v,  20, 


430        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

demption  by  Christ,  would  be  attended  with  contumacy  for 
ever:  were  it  not  for  that  consideration  then,  it  would  be  un- 
worthy of  God  to  pardon  the  sins  of  any  sinner. 

Crellius  adds,  'Punishment  is  not  owing  to  the  sinner, 
but  he  owes  it,  and  owes  to  him,  on  whom  all  the  injury  will 
ultimately  redound,  who  is  God.'  But  because  punishment 
is  not  owing  to  the  sinner,  but  he  owes  it  to  the  ruler,  it 
doth  not  follow,  that  the  ruler  may  not  inflict  that  punish- 
ment: punishment,  indeed,  is  not  so  owing  to  the  sinner  that 
an  injury  would  be  done  him,  were  it  not  inflicted  :  the  debt 
of  a  sinner  is  not  of  such  a  kind,  that  he  can  ask  or  enforce 
the  payment  of  it:  and  a  debt,  properly  speaking,  implies 
such  a  condition.^  But  the  sinner  hath  merited  punishment 
in  such  a  manner,  that  it  is  just  he  should  suffer  it:  but 
again,  the  infliction  of  punishment  belongs  not  to  God,  as 
injured;  which  Crellius  signifies,  but  as  he  is  the  Ruler  of 
all,  and  the  Judge  of  sinners,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  preserve 
the  good  of  the  whole,  and  the  dependance  of  his  creatures 
on  himself. 

He  thus  proceeds  :  '  But  if  you  consider  the  thing  in  it- 
self, every  one  has  it  in  his  power  to  prosecute  his  right,  and 
likewise  not  to  prosecute  it,  or  to  yield  up  of  it  as  much  as 
he  pleases.' 

Ans.  As  Socinus himself,  in  his  third  book  'of  the  Saviour,' 
chap.  2.  hath  aff"orded  an  opportunity  to  all  our  theologians 
who  have  opposed  Socinianism,  of  discussing  this  foolish 
axiom,  '  that  every  one  may  recede  from  his  right ;'  we  shall 
answer  but  in  few  words  to  these  positions  of  Crellius,  and  to 
the  conclusions  which  he  there  draws,  as  flowing  from  them. 

There  is  then  a  double  right :  in  the  first  place,  that  of 
a  debt ;  in  the  second  place,  that  of  government :  what  is 
purely  a  debt,  may  be  forgiven ;  for  that  only  takes  place 
in  those  things,  which  are  of  an  indifferent  right ;  the  pro- 
secution of  which  neither  nature  nor  justice  obliges.  There 
is  also  a  debt,  though  perhaps  improperly  so  called,  the  right 
of  which  it  is  unlawful  to  renounce;  but  our  sins,  in  respect 

K  The  debt  of  a  sinner  is  not  any  valuable  consideration  due  to  him,  as  a  debt  is  to 
a  creditor;  but  due  by  him  as  a  debt  is  by  a  debtor  :  and  in  consequence  of  the  fail- 
ure of  payment,  punishment  becomes  due  to  liim,  i.  e.  is  or  may  be  inflicted  in  vin- 
dication of  violated  justice ;  but  this  is  what  he  could  not  either  claim,  or  would  wish 
to  receive. 


A    DISSERTATIOxV    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         431 

of  God,  are  not  debts  only,  nor  properly,  but  metaphorically'' 
so  called. 

The  right  of  government,  moreover,  is  either  natural  or 
positive ;  the  positive  right  of  government,  so  to  speak,  is 
that  which  magistrates  have  over  their  subjects  ;  and  he  who 
affirms  that  they  can  recede  wholly  from  this  right,  must  be 
either  a  madman  or  a  fool ;  but  this  right,  as  far  as  pertains  to 
its  exercise  in  respect  of  the  infliction  of  punishment,  either 
tends  to  the  good  of  the  whole  republic,  as  in  ordinary  cases ; 
or,  as  in  some  extraordinary  cases,  gives  place,  to  its  hurt : 
for  it  is  possible  that  even  the  exaction  of  punishment,  in  a 
certain  condition  of  a  state,  may  be  hurtful :  in  such  a  situa- 
tion of  things,  the  ruler  or  magistrate  has  a  power  not  to  use 
his  right  of  government,  in  respect  of  particular  crimes  ;  or 
rather,  he  ought  to  use  it  in  such  a  manner  as  is  the  most 
likely  to  attain  the  end  :  for  he  is  bound  to  regard  princi- 
pally the  good  of  the  whole ;  and  the  safety  of  the  people 
ought  to  be  his  supreme  law.  But  he  who  affirms,  that  in 
ordinary  cases  a  magistrate  may  renounce  his  right,  when 
that  renunciation  cannot  but  turn  out  to  the  hurt  of  the  pub- 
lic good,  is  a  stranger  to  all  right.  The  same  person  may 
also  affirm,  that  parents  may  renounce  their  right  over  their 
children,  so  as  not  to  take  any  care  at  all  about  them  ;  and 
that  they  might  do  so  lawfully,  that  is,  consistent  with  ho- 
nour and  decency.  Yea,  this  is  not  a  cessation  from  the 
prosecution  of  right,  but  from  the  performance  of  a  duty  : 
for  the  right  of  government  supposes  a  duty  :  '  for  rulers  are 
not  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil :  wilt  thou  then 
not  be  afraid  of  the  power?  do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou 
shalt  have  praise  of  the  same  :  for  he  is  the  minister  of  God 
to  thee  for  good.  But  if  thou  do  that  which  is  evil,  be 
afraid,  for  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain  :  for  he  is  the 
minister  of  God,  a  revenger  to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that 
doeth  evil.''  The  question  is  not  what  magistrates  do,  but 
what  as  the  guardians  and  protectors  of  the  law  they  ought 
to  do.     See  Psal.  ci.  8. 

There  is  also  a  natural  right  of  government :  such  is  the 

•>  Sin  is  most  accurately  defined  by  our  Westminster  divines,  in  that  inimitable 
compendium  of  sound  doctrine,  the  shorter  catechism,  to  be  'any  want  of  conformity 
unto,  or  transgression  of  the  law  of  God.' 

'Rom.  xiii.  3,  4. 


432        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

divine  right  over  the  creatures  :  the  right,  I  say,  of  God  over 
rational  creatures  is  natural  to  him,  therefore  immutable, 
indispensable,  and  which  cannot  by  any  means  be  derogated. 
Thence  too,  the  debt  of  our  obedience  is  natural  and  indis- 
pensable, nor  is  there  any  other  kind  of  obligation  to  pu- 
nishment. God,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  thing,  has  do- 
minion over  us,  and  our  subjection  to  him,  is  either  by  obe- 
dience or  a  vicarious  punishment,  which  succeeds  in  case 
of  any  omission  or  transgression  on  our  part,  as  Crellius 
himself  acknowledges.  Those  then  who  say,  that  it  is  free 
to  God  to  use  this  right  or  not,  as  he  pleaseth,  may  as  well 
say,  that  it  is  free  to  God,  to  be  our  God  and  Lord  or  not. 
For  the  demand  of  obedience,  and  the  exaction  of  punish- 
ment, equally  belong  to  God.  But  the  Judge  of  the  universe 
exercises  his  right ;  and  his  perpetual  right,  whence  sinners 
are  accounted  worthy  of  death,  he  cannot  but  preserve  un- 
impaired and  entire. 

The  remaining  objections  which  are  interspersed  here 
and  there  in  that  book  of  his  'concerning  God,'  against  the 
vindicatory  justice  of  God,  either  fall  in  with  those  which 
have  been  mentioned  from  the '  Racovian  catechism,'  or  shall 
be  reduced  to  the  order  of  those  which  follow. 

We  think  proper,  by  way  of  conclusion,  to  annex  some 
concessions  of  Crellius.  *  There  is,' says  he,  'a  certain  regard 
to  honour  with  which  God  himself  cannot  dispense."'  Every 
transgression  then  of  that  regard  hath  a  punishment  coeval 
with  itself,  which,  from  the  justice  of  God  must  necessarily 
be  inflicted.  '  Yea,'  says  he,  *  neither  the  holiness  nor  majesty 
of  God  permit  that  his  commands  should,  in. any  respect,  be 
violated  with  impunity.^  But  the  holiness  of  God  is  natural 
to  him  :  an  essential,  then,  and  necessary  attribute  of  God  re- 
quires the  punishment  of  sinners  :  but  he  himself  farther 
adds,  'it  is  unworthy  of  God  to  let  the  wickedness  of  obsti- 
nate sinners  pass  unpunished  :  for  this  is  the  first  and  per- 
petual eflfect  of  divine  severity,  not  to  pardon  those  who  do 
not  repent.'™  But  we  know  for  certain,  that  all  sinners 
would  continue  obstinate  to  all  eternity,  unless  God  be 
pleased,  for  Christ's  sake,  to  renew  them  by  his  omnipotent 
grace  to  repentance.    Crellius  then  grants,  that  it  is  unwor- 

^  Book  i.  chap,  xxiii.  p.  1 80.  •  Of  the  true  Religion.'         "  Book  i.  chap,  xxviii. 
"'  Chap.  xxii.  186.  and  chap,  xxviii. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        433 

thy  of  God  to  let  the  sins  of  those  pass  unpunished,  for  whom 
Christ  hath  not  made  satisfaction.  He  again  testifies  also, 
that  God  hates  and  abhors  all  sin;°  and  grants  that  the  mode 
of  conducting  the  punishment  of  sin  is  derived  from  the  di- 
vine justice."  But  the  thing  itself  is  from  that  same  being, 
from  whom  the  mode  or  manner  of  it  is  derived :  if  the  mode 
of  punishment  be  from  divine  justice,  the  punishment  itself 
can  flow  from  no  other  source. 


CHAP.  X. 

llie  opinion  of  Socinius  considered.  What  he  thought  of  our  present  ques- 
tion,^ viz.  that  it  is  the  hinye  on  which  the  whole  controversy/,  concerning 
the  satisfaction  of  Christ  turns.  His  vain  boasting,  as  if  having  disproved 
this  vindicatory  justice,  he  had  snatched  the  prize  from  his  adversaries. 
Other  clear  proof s  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ.  That  it  is  our  duty  to 
acquiesce  in  the  revealed  will  of  God.  The  truth  not  to  he  forsaken, 
Mercy  and  justice  not  opposite.  Vain  distinctions  of  Socinus  concerning 
divine  justice.  The  consideration  of  these  distinctioyis.  His  first  argu- 
ment against  vindicatory  justice.  The  solution  of  it.  The  auger  and  se- 
verity of  God,  tvhat.  Universal  and  particular  justice,  in  what  they 
agree.     The  false  reasoning  and  vain  boasting  of  the  adversary. 

We  come  now  to  Socinus  himself.  In  almost  all  his  writ- 
ings he  opposes  this  punitory  justice.  We  shall  consider 
what  he  hath  written  against  Covetus,  in  that  treatise  of  his 
entitled,  *  Of  Jesus  Christ  the  Saviour ;'  and  what  he  only 
repeats  in  other  places,  as  occasion  required.  In  the  first 
book,  and  first  chapter ;  and  also  in  the  third  book,  and  first 
chapter  of  that  work,  expressly,  and  of  set  purpose,  he  op- 
poses himself  vehemently,  and  with  all  his  might,  to  the 
truth  on  this  point.  But  because  he  very  well  understood, 
that,  by  the  establishment  of  this  justice,  a  knife  is  put  to 
the  throat  of  his  opinion,  and  that  it  cannot  be  defended 
(that  is,  that  no  reason  can  be  given  why  Christ  our  Saviour 
is  called  Jesus  Christ),  he  maintains  that  the  whole  contro- 
versy concerning  the  satisfactioi  of  ^Christ  hinges  on  this 
very  question.  The  reader  will  perceive  from  the  argu- 
ments already  used,  that  I  am  of  the  same  opinion.  For,  it 
being  granted  that  this  justice  belongs  to  God,  not  even  So- 

"  Chap.  XXX.  3.  9.  "  Chap.  i.  p.  78.  of  his  Answer  to  Grotius. 

■*  Viz.  Whether  vindicatory  justice  be  essential  and  natural  to  God,  and  the  exer- 
cise of  it  or  the  punishment  of  sin,  consequently  necessary  ? 


434  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

cinus,  though  doubtless  a  man  of  a  great,  very  artful,  and 
fertile  genius,  could  devise  any  way  of  obtaining  salvation 
for  sinners  without  a  satisfaction.  For  had  he  either  found 
out  one,  or  even  feigned  it  upon  a  supposition,  he  would  not 
have  wanted  the  effrontery  of  imposing  it  on  the  minds  of 
the  credulous  and  fanatic,  which,  however,  he  nowhere  hath 
attempted. 

But  on  the  other  hand,  gallantly  supposing  that  he  had 
removed  this  justice  out  of  the  way,  as  if  the  business  were 
entirely  settled,  and  the  strong  tower  of  his  adversaries  de- 
stroyed, he  highly  glories  in  the  triumphs  acquired  for  him- 
self and  his  followers  :  '  for,'  says  he,  *  having  got  rid  of  this 
justice,  had  we  no  other  argument,  that  human  fiction  of  the 
satisfaction  of  Jesus  Christ  must  be  thoroughly  detected  and 
totally  vanish.'  This  vain  boasting  of  his,  the  learned  and 
pious  have  long  ago  sufficiently  checked  by  innumerable  tes- 
timonies from  Scripture. 

And  forasmuch  as  the  fact  is  abmidantly  clear,  that 
Christ  bore  our  sins,  God  laying  them  upon  him,  and  that 
by  his  satisfaction  he  purchased  eternal  salvation ;  though 
it  had  even  pleased  God  to  keep  the  causes  and  reasons  of 
this  infinitely  wise  transaction,  hid  to  all  eternity,  in  the 
abyss  of  his  own  goodness  and  wisdom,  it  would  have  been 
our  duty  to  acquiesce  in  the  infinite  holiness  and  wisdom  of 
his  will.  So  also  it  is  beyond  any  doubt,  that  no  helps  of 
our  faith  are  to  be  despised,  and  that  no  revelations  of  the 
divine  nature  and  will  are  to  be  neglected,  by  which  our 
merciful  Father  leads  us  into  a  more  intimate  and  saving 
knowledge  of  this  mystery  of  holiness. 

We  also,  to  whom  the  most  sacred  deposit  of  this  divine 
truth  hath  been  committed,  would  immediately  judge  our- 
selves unworthy  of  it,  should  we  spontaneously  betray  any 
one  point  or  jot  of  it,  much  less  so  strong  a  pillar  of  our 
faith  and  hope  to  its  adversaries.  Though  then  we  have 
other  unanswerable  proofs  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
which  the  gates  of  hell  shall  in  vain  oppose,  and  number- 
less testimonies  of  the  God  who  cannot  lie  ;  so  that  we  may 
suppose  Socinus  is  only  idly  insulting  those,  who  grant 
that  God  might  forgive  sin  without  any  intervention  of  a 
satisfaction,  but  that  he  would  not,  an  expression  which  I 
by  no  means  approve,  we  however  think  it  necessary  that 


A    DISSEHTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  4-35 

this  bulwark  of  punitory  justice,  a  point  beyond  all  doubt 
of  the  last  importance  to  the  cause,  however  it  shall  be  dis- 
posed of,  should  be  defended  from  the  insults  of  adver- 
saries. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  before- 
mentioned  book,  when  going  to  dispute  against  this  justice, 
he  supposes,  that  according  to  our  opinion,  it  is  opposed  to 
mtrcy,  and  that  it  is  contrary  to  ;  it  and  builds  upon  this 
false  supposition,  through  the  whole  of  his  treatise,  both  in 
making  his  objections  and  answers.     I  acknowledge  that  he 
seized  the  opportunity  of  making  this  blunder  from  Cove- 
tus,  against  whom  he  is  combating,  who  improperly  and  in- 
accurately hath  said,  that  this  justice  is  opposed  to  mercy, 
because  they  have  different  effects  ;  but  we  have  formerly 
shewn,  that  they  are  neither  essentially,  nor  actually,  nor 
effectively  opposite,  as  both  of  them  are  the  very  perfection 
of  Deity  itself,  but  that  they  are  only  distinguished  as  to 
their  object,  and  not  as  to  their  subject.     In  all  the  sophisms 
then,  in  which  he  afterward  endeavours  to  prove,  that  the 
Scripture  acknowledges  no  such  justice  in  God,  as  is  op- 
posed to  mercy,  he  trifles  through  a  perpetual  mistake  of  the 
argument.     But  that  justice  which  we  mean,  he  says,  is 
twofold,  in  God.     '  The  first,'  as  he  says,  '  is  that  by  which 
he  punishes  and  destroys  the  wicked  and  ungodly,  that  is, 
those  who  obstinately  persevere  in  wickedness,  and  who  are 
not  led  from  a  repentance  of  their  sins  to  have  recourse  to 
God.     The  second  is  that,  by  which,  even  those  whom  in 
his  great  goodness  he  approves  as  just,  were  he  so  to  will  it, 
could  not  stand  in  his  presence.' 

But  he  again  affirms  in  the  same  chapter,  'that  the  jus- 
tice of  God  is  twofold,  that  one  kind  he  always  uses  when 
he  punishes  abandonedly  wicked  and  obstinate  sinners, 
sometimes  according  to  his  law;  the  other  kind  when  he 
punishes  sinners  neither  obstinate,  nor  altogether  desperate, 
but  whose  repentance  is  not  expected.'  And  of  both  these 
kinds  of  justice  he  brings  some  proofs  from  Scripture. 

That  punitory  justice  is  one  alone  and  individual,  we 
affirm  ;  but  that  it  is  variously  exercised,  on  account  of  the 
difference  of  the  objects  about  which  it  is  employed,  we  ac- 
knowledge ;  but  this,  by  no  means  proves  it  to  be  twofold ; 
for  he  ought  not,  among  men,  to  be  said  to  be  endowed  with 


436         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

a  twofold    justice,  who  renders  different  recompenses  to 
those  who  merit  differently.     But  his  whole  treatise,  from 
beginning  to  end,  is  disgracefully  built  on  a  mistaken  and 
falsely  assumed  principle  :  for  he  supposes,  that  '  every  sin 
shall  not  receive  its  just  recompense  of  reward,'  from  divine 
justice;  but  that  God  punishes  some  sins,  and  can  punish 
others  only  if  he  please.     From  an  exceeding  desire  to  ex- 
clude all  consideration  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  entirely, 
in  the  matter  of  inflicting  punishment  for  sins,  he  stumbled 
against  this  stone :  for  God  most  certainly  will  finally  pu- 
nish the  impenitent  to  all  eternity;  because  he  is  just,  and 
because  there  is  no  sacrifice  for  their  sins :  nor  is  it  less 
true,   that   God   casts   out  and   destroys  many,   who   are 
strangers  to  the  covenant  of  grace,  not  waiting  for  their  re- 
pentance ;  but  that  he  effectually  leads  others  to  repent- 
ance; not  because  he  exerciseth  a  twofold  justice,  but  be- 
cause his  justice  hath  been  satisfied  for  the  sins  of  the  latter 
by  Christ,  whereas  it  is  not  so  with  regard  to  the  former. 
See  Rom.  iii.  25.     But  because  he  would  not  acknowledge 
the  foundation  for  that  distinction,  which  may  be  seen  in  the 
acts  or  exercise  of  the  divine  justice  concerning  sinners,  to 
be  laid  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  he  hath  feigned  a  twofold 
justice,  and  a  twofold  mercy  opposed  to  it,  of  which  there 
IS  not  the  most  distant  mention  made  in  the  sacred  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  which  ought  not  by  any  means  to  be  ascribed  to 
the  divine  nature,  which  is  in  itself  most  simple. 

But  coming  to  himself  again,  he  denies  that  in  the  sacred 
writings  there  is  any  mention  at  all  made  of  any  kind  of 
justice  that  is  opposed  to  mercy;  we,  indeed,  have  never 
said  that  justice  is  opposed  to  mercy;  but  as  it  clearly  ap- 
pears, that  it  is  his  wish  to  deny  to  God  the  whole  of  that 
kind  of  justice,  whence  in  punishing  sins  he  is  said,  or  may 
be  said  to  be  just  (which  punishment  is  an  effect  different 
from  the  pardon  of  sin  that  flows  from  mercy),  we  choose 
not  to  contend  about  words.  Let  us  see  then  what  kind  of 
arguments  he  produces  to  support  his  robbing  God  of  this 
essential  attribute.  He  says,  *  that  the  word  justice,  when 
applied  to  God  in  the  sacred  writings,  is  never  opposed  to 
mercy,  but  chiefly,  and  for  the  most  part,  means  rectitude 
and  equity.' 

It  hath  been  already  several  times  shewn,  that  justice 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  437 

and  mercy  are  not  opposite.  We  have  likewise  demonstrated 
by  many  proofs  adduced  before,  that  the  rectitude  of  supreme 
perfection  of  the  divine  nature,  is  often  called  justice  in 
Scripture  :  but  this,  I  am  sure,  is  by  no  means  of  advantage, 
but  of  much  hurt  to  the  cause  of  Socinianism.  Let  him 
proceed  then. 

'  But  that,'  says  he,  '  which  is  opposed  to  mercy,  is  not 
named  justice  by  the  sacred  writers;  but  is  called  severity, 
or  anger,  or  fury,  or  vengeance,  or  by  some  such  name.' 

But  our  opponent  avails  himself  nothing  by  this  asser- 
tion ;  for  that  which  is  false  proves  nothing.    By  that,  which 
he  says,  is  opposed  to  mercy,  he  understands  that  virtue  in 
God,  by  which  he  punishes   sins  and  sinners  according  as 
they  deserve.     But  that  this  is  never  called  justice  in  Scrip- 
ture, or  that  God  is  not  thence  said  to  be  just,  is  so  mani- 
festly false,  that  no  body  would  dare  to  affirm  it,  but  one 
determined  to  say  any  thing  in  support  of  a  bad  cause.  Let 
the  reader  but  consult  the  passages  adduced  on  this  head  in 
the  third  chapter,  and  he  will  be  astonished  at  the  impu- 
dence of  the  man.     But  all  are  agreed,  that  anger,  fury,  and 
words  denoting  such  troubled  affections,  ought  not  properly 
to  be  ascribed  to  God,  but  only  in  respect  of  their  effects  ; 
though  analogically  and  reductively''  they  belong  to  correc- 
tive justice;  because,  in  exercising  his  judgments,  God  is 
said  to  use  them  ;  but  they  do  not  denote  any  perfection  in- 
herent in  God,  any  farther  than  they  can  be  reduced  to  jus- 
tice ;  but  only  a  certain  mode  of  certain  divine  actions  ;  for 
God  doth  not  punish  sins  because  he  is  angry,  but  because 
he  is  just;  although  in  the  punishment  of  them,  according 
to  our  conception  of  things,  he  discovers  anger. 

He  next  proceeds  to  produce  some  passages,  in  order  to 
prove  that  the  justice  of  God,  in  the  sacred  writings,  viz.  that 
universal  justice,  which  we  have  before  described,  is  often 
used  for  the  infinite  rectitude  of  the  divine  nature  (what  no- 
body ever  denied),  where,  in  mentioning  the  justice  of  faith- 
fulness and  remunerative  justice,  agreeable  to  his  faithful- 
ness, which  always  hath  respect  to  the  covenant  of  grace, 
ratified  and  established  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  God  is  said 
to  pardon  sins,  and  to  reward  those  that  believe  accordino- 
to  his  justice  ;  and  thence  he  concludes,  '  that  a  justice  op- 

■•  i.  e.  hy  consequence. 


438  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

posed  to  mercy,  by  which  God  must  punish  sin,  is  not  inhe- 
rent in  God.'  *  For  what/  says  he, '  is  more  agreeable  to  the 
divine  nature,  and  consequently,  more  equitable  and  just, 
than  to  do  good  to  the  wretched  and  despised  race  of  man- 
kind, though  unworthy ;  and  freely  to  make  them  partakers 
of  his  glory.' 

This  surely  is  trifling  in  a  serious  matter,  if  any  thing  can 
be  so  called,  for  even  novices  will  not  bear  one  to  arsue 
from  a  position  of  universal  justice  to  a  negation  of  particu- 
lar justice;  much  less  shall  we  readily  assent  to  him,  who 
maintain,  that  that  particular  justice  is  by  no  means  distin- 
guished from  the  universal  rectitude  of  the  divine  nature  ; 
but  that  that  rectitude  is  so  called,  in  respect  of  the  egresses, 
that  it  has,  in  consequence  of  the  supposition  of  sin  ;  but  it 
is  consonant  with  sound  doctrine,  'that  that  which  is  agree- 
able to  the  divine  nature,  should  be  considered  also  as  righ- 
teous and  just ;'  and  this  Socinus  acknowledges.  We  agree, 
that  it  is  agreeble  to  the  divine  nature  to  do  good  to  sin- 
ners ;  but  at  the  same  time  we  dare  not  deny,  '  that  the 
right  of  God  is,  that  those  who  transgress  are  worthy  of 
death  ;  both  which  properties  of  his  nature,  he  hath  very 
clearly  demonstrated  in  the  satisfaction  of  Christ;  'whom 
he  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation,  through  faith  in  his 
blood,  to  declare  his  righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins ;' 
whom,  while  the  heretic  rejecteth,  he  walketh  in  darkness, 
a  stranger  to  the  true  and  saving  knowledge  of  God,  and  en- 
gaged wholly  in  his  own  vain  imaginations. 

But  Socinus,  as  if  having  achieved  some  great  exploit, 
at  length  thus  concludes:  'That  punitory  justice  is  not  a 
virtue  inherent  in  God,  or  a  divine  quality  or  property,  but 
the  effect  of  his  will;  and  that  that  justice,  by  which  God 
always  punishes  impenitent  sinners,  is  so  called,  not  pro- 
perly, but  by  accident,  viz.  because  it  is  agreeable  to  true 
justice  or  rectitude.'  We  have  already  considered  the  ar- 
guments that  he  has  produced  in  support  of  this  opinion  ; 
whether  they  be  of  such  weight,  that  they  should  induce  us 
to  deny  this  justice;  and  whether,  to  punish  sinners  be  es- 
sential and  proper  to  God,  or  only  accidental,  let  the  rea- 
ders, from  what  hath  been  said  on  the  subject,  determine. 
So  much  for  our  first  skirmish  with  Socinus. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        439 


CHAP.  XI. 

The  arguments  of  Socinus  against  punitory  justice  tveighed.  A  false  hy- 
pothesis of  his.  Sins,  in  what  sense  they  are  debts.  The  first  argument 
of  Socinus,  in  which  he  takes  for  granted  what  ought  to  have  been  proved. 
A  trifling  supposition  substituted  for  a  proof.  Whether  that  excellence, 
by  virtue  of  ivhich  God  punishes  sins,  be  called  justice  in  the  Scriptures. 
The  severity  of  God,  what.  Our  opponent's  second  argument.  It  la- 
bours under  the  same  deficiency  as  the  first.  It  is  not  opposite  to  mercy 
to  punish  the  guilty.  There  is  a  distinction  between  acts  and  habits.  Our 
opponent  confounds  them.  The  mercy  of  God  infinite,  so  also  is  his  jus- 
tice. A  distinction  of  the  diiine  attributes.  In  pardoning  sins  tJirouyh 
Jesus  Christ,  God  hath  exercised  infinite  justice  and  infinite  mercy.  The 
conclusion  of  the  contest  unlh  Socinus. 

In  the  third  part,  and  first  chapter  of  his  treatise,  being  de- 
termined to  contend,  to  his  utmost,  against  the  satisfaction 
of  Christ,  he  maintains,  '  that  God,  consistent  with  his  right, 
could  pardon  our  sins,  without  any  real  satisfaction  received 
for  them.'  And  he  endeavours  to  support  the  assertion, 
chiefly  by  the  following  argument,  viz.  '  That  God  is  our 
creditor,  that  our  sins  are  debts,  which  we  have  contracted 
with  him ;  but  that  every  one  may  yield  up  his  right,  and 
more  especially  God,  who  is  the  supreme  Lord  of  all,  and 
extolled  in  the  Scriptures  for  his  liberality  and  goodness. 
Hence,  then,  it  is  evident,  that  God  can  pardon  sins  without 
any  satisfaction  received  ;  and  that  he  is  inclined  to  do  so, 
he  uses  his  best  endeavours  afterward  to  prove.' 

But  because  he  foresaw  that  his  first  supposition,  the 
foundation  of  his  whole  future  reasoning,  was  too  much  ex- 
posed and  obnoxious  to  the  divine  justice,  he  labours  hard, 
in  the  first  chapter,  to  remove  that  out  of  the  way  entirely. 
Let  us  attend  then  to  his  reasoning,  and  follow  him  step  by 
step  ;  for  if  he  have  not  insuperably,  and  beyond  all  con- 
futation proved,  that  God  can  forgive  sins  without  a  satis- 
faction, what  he  afterward  argues  concerning  the  will,  libe- 
rality, and  mercy  of  God,  will  become  of  no  weight  or  con- 
sideration; yea,  the  foundation  being  destroyed,  the  whole 
edifice,  or  Babylonish  tower,  must  instantly  tumble  to  the 
ground.     He  thus  proceeds : 

'  But  you  will  say.  It  is  necessary  that  God  should  take 


440         A    D.ISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

care  to  satisfy  his  justice,  which  he  cannot,  even  himself, 
renounce,  unless  he,  in  a  manner,  deny  himself.' 

^tis.  You  are  right,  Socinus ;  we  do  affirm,  agreeable  to 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  that  the  justice  of  God  is  in  such  a 
manner  natural  to  him,  that  if  it  be  necessary  that  he  should 
preserve  the  glory  of  his  essential  attributes  undiminished, 
he  cannot  but  indispensably  exact  the  punishment  of  every 
sin  and  transgression  of  his  law,  and  render  a  just  recom- 
pense of  reward  to  all  sinners,  or  to  their  surety  ;  and  there- 
fore we  contend,  that  without  a  satisfaction  made,  no  one 
could  obtain  the  remission  of  sins,  and  eternal  salvation. 
Let  us  see,  Socinus,  what  you  have  to  oppose  to  this. 

*  All  along  from  the  beginning  of  this  answer,'  says  he,  *  I 
have  sufficiently  shewn,  that  that  justice  which  you  contend 
ought  at  all  events  to  be  satisfied,  is  not  inherent  in  God, 
but  is  the  effect  of  his  own  will  ;  for  when  God  punishes 
sinners,  that  we  may  call  this  work  of  his  by  some  worthy 
name,  we  say  that  he  then  exerciseth  justice  ;  wherefore, 
there  is  no  need  that  God  should  either  provide  for  the  sa- 
tisfaction of  that  justice,  or  renounce  it.' 

j4ns.  We  have  already  considered  what  Socinus  says,  in 
the  beginning  of  his  treatise,  against  the  justice  of  God  ;  if 
I  mistake  not,  we  have  shewn,  that  the  heretic  had  lost  his 
labour,  and  that  it  is  far  beyond  his  power  to  dethrone  the 
Deity;  'for  he  sitteth  on  his  throne  judging*  righteously.' 
But  we  diminutive  beings  have  not  first,  or  of  our  own  ac- 
cord, maintained,  that  God  is  just,  and  that  he  exerciseth 
justice  in  the  punishment  of  sinners,  '  that  we  might  call 
his  work  by  some  worthy  name  ;'  but  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth  himself,  the  God  of  truth,  in  almost  innumerable  places, 
gives  this  testimony  of  himself  in  the  sacred  records,  and 
these  ought  always  to  be  the  only,  as  they  are  the  infallible 
guide  of  our  judgments. 

Distrusting  then  what  he  has  formerly  asserted  (or  it 
being  manifestly  of  no  weight),  he  attempts  again,  by  other 
sophisms,  to  establish  the  reasoning  which  he  had  formerly 
begun.     And  he  thus  proceeds: 

'  But  besides  the  arguments  which  I  have  already  used, 
to  prove  that  that  justice  is  not  inherent  in  God,  it  chiefly 
appears  from  this,  that  were  it  naturally  resident  in  God,  he 

»  Psal.  ix.  4. 


A    DISSERTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        441 

could  never  pardon  not  even  the  least  transgression  to  any 
one  5  for  God  never  doeth  any  thing,  nor  can  do  any  thing 
that  is  opposite  to  the  qualities  inherent  in  him  :  as  for  in- 
stance, as  wisdom  and  equity  are  naturally  inherent  in  God, 
that  justice  never  doth,  or  can  do  any  thing  contrary  to 
wisdom  and  equity,  as  we  have  seen  above,'  he. 

The  intelligent  reader  can  easily  perceive,  that  Socinus 
proves  nothing  by  this  argument,  but  that  he  even  absurdly 
adds  heap  upon  heap  to  his  own  supposition  ;  or  that  with 
a  bold  effrontery,  he  takes  for  granted  the  thing  to  be  deter- 
mined. It  is,  indeed,  our  opinion,  that  God  cannot  pass  the 
smallest  sin  unpunished,  and  that  he  cannot,  because  he  can 
do  nothing  that  is  opposite  to  the  qualities  inherent  in  him. 
But  this  our  opponent  brings  forward  as  a  great  absurdity, 
that  must  bear  against  us  in  support  of  our  own  cause,  but 
without  even  any  appearance  of  a  proof.  But  we  have  be- 
fore demonstrated  the  state  of  the  matter  to  be  thus  :  that 
God  neither  actually  pardons  any  sin,  without  a  satisfaction 
made,  or  can  pardon  it,  without  an  infringement  of  his  jus- 
tice, by  which  he  condemns  sinners  worthy  of  death.  So 
that,  as  God  never  doth,  nor  can  do  the  things  Vv'hich  are  op- 
posite to  his  equity  and  wisdom;  so  he  neither  doth,  nor  can 
do  those  which  are  opposite  to  his  justice.  But  to  pardon 
the  sins  of  believers,  on  account  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ, 
*  whom  he  hath  set  forth  as  a  propitiation  through  faith  in 
his  blood,  to  declare  his  righteousness,'  is  not  opposite  to 
his  justice.  But  these  seem  absurdities  to  Socinus,  and  why 
should  not  they  ?  'For  we  preach  Christ  crucified,  unto  the 
Jews  a  stumbling-block,  and  unto  the  Greeks  foolishness  ; 
— but  this  preaching  of  the  cross  is  to  them  that  perish  fool- 
ishness.'* 

Yea,  in  common  equity,  nothing  could  be  mentioned 
more  unequitable  and  unwise,  than  this  would  be  opposite 
to  justice,  viz.  not  to  pardon  those  sins  for  which  that  jus- 
tice hath  been  amply  satisfied  :  and  must  then  this  heretic, 
not  only,  for  nothing,  substitute  his  own  most  absurd,  yea, 
execrable  opinion,  viz.  *  That  Jesus  Christ  hath  not  made 
satisfaction  for  our  sins,  nor  borne  their  punishment;  that 
is,  that  he  was  not  made  sin  for  us,  that  we  might  be  made 
the  righteousness  of  God  in  him?'  An  opinion  neither  prov- 

^  1  Cor.  chap.  i. 
VOL.  IX.  2    G 


442       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

ed,  nor  that  will  ever  be  proved,  to  all  eternity :  but  also  in- 
sinuate it  as  a  proof  of  another  error,  which  that  alone,  it  is 
evident,  first  begot  in  his  mind.  Indeed,  I  cannot  suffi- 
ciently wonder,  that  some,  by  the  sophisms  of  such  disput- 
ants, are  so  easily  transformed  to  another  gospel,  *  forsaking 
him  who  called  them  to  the  grace  of  Christ.' 

'  But  that  justice,'  says  Socinus, '  which,  as  we  have  seen 
before,  in  the  sacred  writings,  is  not  called  justice,  but  seve- 
rity or  vengeance,  or  by  some  such  names,  so  far  as  it  is  op- 
posed to  mercy,  is  nothing  else  but  to  punish  sins;  but  to 
punish  sins,  and  to  pardon  sins,  are  entirely  opposite  to  one 
another.' 

A  fine  painter's  shew-board,  but  void  of  truth. 

Atis.  What  the  adversary  so  often  yelps  out,  is  totally 
without  foundation,  viz.  that  that  justice  is  never  called  by 
its  proper  name  in  the  Scriptures.  It  is  not  only  called  by 
its  own  name,  but  is  also  called  purity  and  holiness,  which 
are  essential  attributes  of  the  Deity.  It  is  called  severity, 
vengeance,  and  anger,  but  only  improperly,  and  analogically, 
and  in  respect  of  the  effects  which  it  produceth.  What  he 
asserts  too  of  this  justice,  viz.  that  it  is  nothing  else  but  to 
punish  sin,  very  improperly  confounding  a  habit,  an  act,  and 
an  effect,  is  altogether  without  foundation,  and  most  absurd. 
*  The  Lord  is  just,  and  his  judgments  are  righteous  :  the 
judge  of  all  the  earth  doeth  right.'  And  in  fine,  it  is  false, 
that  this  justice  is  opposed  to  mercy.  For  it  is  beyond  any 
doubt,  that  different  operations  and  effects  may,  in  different 
views,  be  ascribed  to  one  and  the  same  righteous  principle. 
To  punish  sins,  and  to  pardon  sins,  unless  spoken  in  the 
same  point  of  view,  are  not  opposed  to  one  another.  God, 
indeed,  pardons  to  us  those  sins  which  he  punished  in  our 
surety;  which  foolishness  of  God  is  wiser  than  men. 

Our  opponent  thus  proceeds  :  'If  that  justice  be  inherent 
in  God  ;  that  is,  if  there  be  any  property  in  God,  which  is 
altogether  inclined  expressly  to  punish  any  sins  of  mankind 
whatsoever,  whether  penitent  or  impenitent,  he  neither  spares, 
nor  can  spare  any  one  ;  for  as  to  what  you  teachers  in  the 
church  have  devised,  that  according  to  this  justice,  he  can 
punish  sin,  even  though  the  sinner  should  not  be  punished; 
that  is  quite  inconsistent  with  this,  and  every  other  kind  of 
justice.' 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        443 

Our  opponent  again  idly  fancies,  that  we  are  hard  pressed 
by  this  conclusion  :  we  grant,  yea,  we  solemnly  believe  and 
declare,  that  because  of  his  justice,  God  can  never  spare 
any  sinner,  unless  he  expressly  punish  his  sins  in  another. 
But  he  artfully  and  shrewdly  endeavours  to  load  our  opinion 
with  prejudice,  insinuating,  '  that  God  then  could  not  even 
spare  the  penitent.'  But  we  believe  all  repentance  of  sin  to 
be  founded  in  the  satisfaction  and  blood  of  Christ ;  for,  *  him 
God  hath  exalted  with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a 
Saviour,  to  give  repentance  to  Israel,  and  forgiveness  of 
sins.""  God  then  both  can  spare  the  penitent,  and  according 
to  the  promises  of  the  gospel,  most  certainly  doth  spare 
them  :  those,  viz.  for  whose  sins,  satisfaction  hath  been 
made  through  the  blood  of  Christ,  '  who  gave  himself  a  ran- 
som for  them  :'  but,  that  to  punish  sin,  without  the  delin- 
quent's being  punished,  is  neither  contrary  to  this,  nor  to 
any  other  kind  of  justice,  absolutely  considered,  through 
divine  help,  shall  be  demonstrated  in  its  proper  place. 

Hitherto  our  opponent  hath  discovered  nothing  but  mere 
fancies,  vain  repetitions,  absurd  allegations,  and  a  shameful 
ignorance  of  the  argument.  He  thus  proceeds  :  '  But  should 
you  say,  that  by  the  same  reasoning  it  may  be  proved,  that 
mercy  is  not  inherent  in  God  ;  for  if  it  were,  he  could  never 
inflict  punishment  on  any,  as  mercy  is  nothing  else,  but  to 
pardon  those  who  have  offended.  I  will  answer,  as  I  have 
slightly  noticed  before,  that  it  is  very  true,  that  mercy,  so 
far  as  it  is  opposed  to  that  justice,  that  is,  to  severity  and 
vengeance,  is  not  inherent  in  God,  but  is  the  effect  of  his 
will :  when  then  the  sacred  Scriptures  testify,  that  God  is 
merciful,  they  mean  nothing  more,  than  that  God  very  often, 
and  very  easily  pardoneth  sin,  if  at  least  they  speak  of  this 
mercy  ;  for  there  is  another  kind  of  divine  mercy,  of  which, 
according  to  the  old  translation,  mention  is  frequently  made 
in  the  sacred  writings,  which  ought  rather  to  be  called  good- 
ness, and  hath  a  more  extensive  signification  ;  for  it  com- 
prehends the  whole  divine  beneficence,  whether  it  be  exer- 
cised in  the  pardon  of  sin,  or  in  communication  of  any  other 
kind  of  benefit  to  mankind.' 

It  hath  been  shewn  already,  that  it  is  not  proved  by 
such  reasoning  as  this,  that  justice  is  not  inherent  in  God; 

•'  Acts  vi. 

2  G  2 


444         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

nor  from  the  force  of  such  an  argument  will  it  easily  appear, 
that  the  divine  mercy  suffers  any  degradation :  what  he  sup- 
poses, in  the  first  place,  is  altogether  without  foundation, 
namely,  'That  the  divine  mercy  is  nothing  else  than  to  for- 
give offenders,^  whereas  in  this,  an  external  effect  of  that 
mercy  is  only  shewn,  which  is  itself  an  essential  property  of 
the  divine  nature ;  for  he  pardoneth  sins,  because  he  is  mer- 
ciful. The  supposition  also  is  groundless,  '  That  if  mercy 
were  inherent  in  God,  he  could  never  inflict  punishment  on 
any.'  For  to  inflict  punishment  on  the  impenitent,  and 
those  for  whose  sins  the  divine  justice  hath  in  no  manner 
been  satisfied,  is  not  opposite  to  mercy. 

For  mercy  in  God  is  not  a  sympathy,  or  condolence  with 
the  miseries  of  others,  with  an  inclination  of  assisting  them, 
a  virtue  which  oft-times  borders  near  upon  vice,  but  is  that 
supreme  perfection  of  the  divine  nature,  whereby  it  is  natu- 
rally disposed  to  assist  the  miserable,  and  which,  the  proper 
suppositions  '^being  made,  and  the  glory  of  his  other  perfec- 
tions preserved,  he  willingly  exerciseth,  and  is  inclined  to 
exercise.  But  this  is  not  opposed  to  the  justice  of  God  ; 
neither  is  it  an  effect  of  his  free-will  (which  expression, 
concerning  the  exercise  of  justice,  our  opponent  foolishly 
wrests  to  the  virtue  itself),  but  a  natural  attribute  of  the 
Deity.  What  he  adds  concerning  a  twofold  mercy  of  God, 
are  idle  fancies  :  for  the  sparing  mercy  of  which  we  are  dis- 
coursing, by  no  means  differs  from  that  benignity,  grace,  or 
goodness  of  God,  of  which  he  makes  mention ;  for  that  very 
benignity,  with  respect  to  the  special  egresses,  which  it 
hath  towards  miserable  sinners,  from  the  free-will  of  God, 
is  that  very  mercy  itself.  That  assertion  of  his  too,  must 
also  be  noticed,  by  the  way,  viz.  '  That  God  very  easily  par- 
doneth sin,'  which  as  it  is  a  very  precious  truth,  if  a  regard 
behad  to  the  oblation  and  satisfaction  of  his  Son  ;  so,  sim- 
ply spoken  of  him,  who  hath  threatened  death  to  every 
transgression,  and  whose  right  it  is,  that  sinners  should  be 
worthy  of  death,  all,  whosoever,  shall  be  cited  before  his 
tribunal,  aliens  and  strangers  to  Christ,  will  find  to  be  without 
foundation,  and  an  absolute  falsehood. 

'  But  it  is  evident,'  says  he,  *  that  neither  the  justice,  nor 
mercy,  of  which  we  are  treating,  are  inherent  in  God,  from 

'  That  is,  the  existence  and  misery  of  a  rational  creature  being  supposed. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         445 

what  we  read,  viz.  '  That  he  is  the  Lord  God,  merciful  and 
gracious,  long-suffering  and  abundant  in  goodness,''^  which 
plainly  shews  that  these  two,  viz.  his  long-suffering  or  slow- 
ness to  anger,  and  his  abundant  goodness,  or  great  mercy, 
are  the  effects  of  his  will,  the  one  of  which  is  surpassed  in 
greatness  by  the  other ;  and  they  cannot  consist  with  one 
another;  and  they  are  limited:  whereas  those  qualities 
which  are  truly  inherent  in  God,  have  no  limit,  and  are  all 
consistent  with  one  another,  and  in  respect  of  their  great- 
ness, are  all  absolutely  equal.' 

Our  opponent  again  very  improperly  applies  a  compa- 
rison made  between  external  acts,  to  the  internal  habits 
themselves.  That,  anger  and  compassion,  which  are  only 
attributed  to  God  effectively,  are  free  effects  of  the  divine 
will,  limited  as  to  their  object,  and  unequal,  which  cannot  be 
exercised  about  the  same  person,  in  their  highest  degree,  we 
acknowledge. 

But  there  is  no  reason  that  what  is  applicable  to  acts,  or 
rather  to  effects,  should  also  be  applicable  to  the  perfec- 
tions whence  these  flow.  But  in  that  promulgation  of  the 
glory  or  name  of  God  which  we  have  in  Exod.  xxxiv.  6. 
he  shews  what,  and  of  what  kind  his  disposition  is  towards 
those  whom,  viz.  he  hath  purchased  as  his  peculiar  people 
through  Jesus  Christ ;  and  what  patience,  long-suffering  and 
compassion  he  is  disposed  to  exercise  towards  them  f  but 
in  respect  of  all  other  sinners,  he  concludes,  *  that  he  will 
by  no  means  clear  the  guilty,'  or  deliver  them  from  the 
guilt  of  sin,  which,  indeed,  strikes  at  the  very  root  of  Soci- 
nianism  :  but  to  conclude  from  this,  that  the  divine  perfec- 
tions are  opposite,  one  to  another,  unequal,  or  surpassing 
one  another  in  greatness,  is  only  the  extreme  folly  of  one, 
'  ignorant  of  the  righteousness,  or  justice,  of  God,  and  going 
about  to  establish  a  righteousness,  or  justice,  of  his  own.* 
lie  proceeds  thus. 

*  Hence  it  is  manifest  how  grievously  they  err,  who  af- 
firm both  this  justice  and  mercy  of  God  to  be  infinite  :  for 
as  to  justice,  being  deceived  by  the  appearance  of  the  word, 
they  see  not,  that  they  say  Vio  more  than  this,  that  the  seve- 
rity and  anger  of  God  are  infinite,  contrary  to  the  most  ex- 
press testimonies  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  which,  as  we  have 

<i  Sec  Exod.  xxxiv.  6.    Numb.  xiv.  18.  «  See  2  Pet.  iii.  9,  &c. 


446         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

just  now  said,  declare  God  to  be  slow  to  anger :  that  divine 
justice  which  hath  no  limit,  is  not  this  of  which  we  are  dis- 
coursinsj :  but  that  which  alone,  as  we  have  seen  before,  is 
distinguished  by  this  illustrious  name  in  Scripture,  and 
which  by  another  name  may  be  called  rectitude  and  equity. 
This  indeed  is  inherent  in  God,  and  is  most  conspicuous  in 
all  his  works  ;  and  by  virtue  of  this  alone,  as  we  shall  see 
hereafter,  even,  if  we  had  no  other  proof,  that  human  fiction 
of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  would  be  thoroughly  detected 
and  vanish.' 

Our  opponent  here  serves  up  again  nothing  but  his  old 
dish  variously  dressed,  and  repeatedly  refused  :  we  declare 
justice  to  be  infinite,  not  deceived  by  the  shew  of  a  word, 
but  being  so  taught  by  the  express  testimonies  of  the  sacred 
Scriptures,  and  by  the  most  convincing  and  unanswerable 
arguments  ;  and  we  solemnly  maintain  it,  not  only  with  re- 
gard to  that  universal  justice  which  may  be  called  rectitude 
(though  improperly),  but  also  concerning  that  particular  sin- 
avenging  justice,  which  we  deny  to  differ  either  essentially 
or  subjectively^  from  the  former :  but  that,  anger  or  seve- 
rity, so  far  as  they  denote  effects  of  divine  justice,  or  punish- 
ment inflicted,  are  infinite  only  in  duration.  'Seeing  it  is 
a  righteous  thing  with  God,  to  take  vengeance  on  them  who 
know  him  not,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ;  who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  de- 
struction from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory 
of  his  power.'s  But  in  respect  of  that  divine  excellence 
which  they  point  out,  we  affirm  them  to  be  in  every  respect 
infinite. 

But  it  would  be  altogether  superfluous,  here  again  to  re- 
peat what  we  have  before  clearly  settled  concerning  this 
justice,  or  again  to  recite  the  texts  of  Scripture  formerly 
adduced.  The  sum  is  this  :  sin-avenging  justice  differs  not 
in  reality,  from  that  universal  justice,  which  our  opponent 
does  not  deny  to  be  perpetually  inherent  in  God,  and  a  na- 
tural attribute  :  it  is  only  distinguished  from  it,  in  respect 
of  its  egress  to  its  own  proper  object ;  for  the  egresses  of 
justice  against  sin,  flow  from  the  most  holy  perfection  of 
Deity  itself.     But  anger  and  severity,  so  far  as  they  may  be 

f  That  is,  as  it  relates  to  God,  who  is  the  subject  of  it. 
K  See  2  Thess.  i.  6.  8,  9. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        447 

reduced  to  that  justice  which  is  manifested  in  them,  are  also 
infinite  ;  in  respect  of  their  effects,  they  have  their  limits 
assigned  them  by  the  wisdom  and  justice  of  God:  these 
things,  however,  have  been  proved  before. 

But  let  the  pious  reader  judge,  whether  our  opponent, 
who  hath  presumed  to  call,  the  highest  mystery  of  the  gos- 
pel, the  alone  foundation  of  the  salvation  of  sinners,  the 
darling  jewel  of  our  religion,  the  greatest  testimony  of  the 
divine  love,  our  victory  over  the  devil,  death,  and  hell,  'a  hu- 
man fiction,'  had  sufficient  cause  to  annex  so  dreadful  an  ex- 
pression to  the  conclusion  of  this  so  long  continued  debate. 
He  adds,  in  the  last  place, 

'  But  as  to  mercy,  that  is  the  pardon  of  sins,  how  dare 
they  affirm  that  to  be  infinite,  when  it  is  evident  from  the 
whole  of  Scripture,  that  God  doth  not  always  use  it,  but  fre- 
quently exerciseth  vengeance  and  severity.  Why,  but  be- 
cause they  have  so  shockingly  blundered,  that  they  have  not 
attended  to  this,  that  these  are  only  different  effects  of  the 
divine  will,  but  are  not  any  properties,  and  have  persuaded 
themselves,  that  both  of  them  are  inherent  in  God  :  but  how 
could  they  ever  entertain  such  a  persuasion,  when,  as  we 
have  said,  the  one  destroys  the  other?  But  this  they  deny^ 
and  maintain  that  God  exercised  both  of  them  perfectly  in 
the  salvation  procured  for  us  by  Christ,  which  will  more 
clearly  appear  from  what  follows  to  be  not  only  false,  but 
ridiculous.  Meantime  let  them  tell  us,  pray,  when  God 
punishes  the  guilty,  but  especially  when  he  doth  not  even 
grant  them  time  to  repent,  what  kind  of  mercy  he  exerciseth 
towards  these  ?  But  if  God  doth  many  things,  in  which  not 
even  any  trace  of  that  mercy  appears,  although  he  be  said 
to  be  merciful  and  full  of  compassion  in  Scripture,  must  we 
not  say  that  he  doeth  many  things,  in  which  that  justice  is 
by  no  means  discernible,  to  which  he  is  said  to  be  exceed- 
ing slow  ?  We  must  then  conclude,  according  to  our  opinion, 
that  there  is  no  such  justice  in  God,  as  expressly  dictates 
the  necessary  punishment  of  sin,  and  which  he  hath  not  a 
power  to  renounce.  And  since  this  is  the  case,  it  is  abun- 
dantly evident,  that  there  is  no  reason  why  God  cannot  freely 
pardon  the  sins  of  whomsoever  he  may  please,  without  any 
satisfaction  received.' 

Alls.  On  these  heads  a  few  observations  shall  suffice  i 


448         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

1.  It  is  affirmed,  without  any  shew  of  jeason,  that  mercy  in 
God  is  not  infinite,  because  sometimes  he  exerciseth  severity, 
that  is,  that  God  cannot  be  called  merciful,  if  he  punish  any 
guilty  and  impenitent  sinners  :  to  prove  mercy  to  be  an  es- 
sential property  of  God,  it  is  sufficient,  that  he  exercises  it 
towards  any :  for  in  this  very  matter,  that  ought  to  be  set 
down  as  a  natural  perfection  in  God,  which  is  the  proper  and 
immediate  source  and  ground  of  that  operation.  Which 
attributes  have  no  egress  but  towards  objects  placed  in  par- 
ticular circumstances ;  nor  have  they  any  effects,  without 
some  free  act  of  the  divine  will''  intervening :  nor  does  it 
any  more  follow  that  the  effects  of  mercy  ought  to  be  in- 
finite, if  it  be  itself  infinite,  than  that  the  works  of  God  ought 
to  be  immense,  because  immensity  is  an  essential  property 
of  his  nature. 

2.  By  what  argument  will  our  opponent  prove,  that  the 
relation  between  mercy  and  justice  is,  in  such  a  manner 
the  same,  that  because  God  exerciseth  no  mercy  towards 
some,  that  is,  so  as  to  pardon  their  sins,  that  therefore  he 
should  not  account  it  necessary  to  exercise  justice  towards 
every  sin  ?  We  have  formerly  mentioned  in  what  view 
they  are  distinct ;  namely,  that  God  is  bound  to  exercise 
mercy  to  none :  but  that,  he  cannot  but  exercise  his  justice- 
towards  sinners  (provided  he  be  inclined  to  be  just),  if  he 
would  preserve  his  natural  right  and  dominion  over  his  crea- 
tures, and  the  holiness  and  purity  of  his  nature  uninjured 
and  entire ;  for  disobedience  would  take  away  all  dependance 
of  the  creature  on  God,  imless  a  compensation  were  made  to 
him  by  a  vicarious  punishment :  but  according  to  the  Sacred 
Scriptures  we  maintain,  that  God  exercised  both  the  one 
and  the  other,  both  justice  and  mercy;  in  justly  punishing 
Christ,  in  mercifully  pardoning  sins  which  he  laid  upon 
him,  to  us,  who  deserved  everlasting  punishment:  which 
things,  though  they  may  be  ridiculous  to  Socinus  (for  the 
things  of  the  Spirit  of  God  are  foolishness  to  him)  no  divine 
truth  hov/ever,  of  any  kind  whatever,  is  more  frequently, 
more  plainly,  or  more  clearly  declared  in  the  sacred  writings. 
*  For  all  have  sinned,  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God ; 
being  justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redemption 
that  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  pro- 

'•  See  Rom.  ix.  13. 


A    DISSEUTATIOK     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         449 

pitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood;  to  declare  his  righteous- 
ness for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past,  through,  the  for- 
bearance of  God  :  to  declare,  I  say,  at  this  time  his  righteous- 
ness :  that  he  might  be  just,  and  the  justifier  of  him,  who 
believeth  in  Jesus/'  But,  setting  the  consideration  of  Christ 
altogether  aside,  there  is  no  doubt,  but  that  Socinus  would 
carry  off  the  prize  in  this  contest.  But  while  it  is  reckoned 
worth  while  to  have  any  regard  to  him,  it  is  easy  to  perceive 
that  this  heretic  uses  nothing  but  continued  false  reasonings 
and  false  conclusions.  For  it  is  made  evident  to  us  in  Christ 
the  Son,  how,  and  by  what  means,  God,  ir.iinitely  merciful 
and  infinitely  just,  acting  on  the  principles  of  strict  justice 
with  some,  and  of  mere  grace  with  others,  but  in  exercising 
both  the  one  and  the  other,  both  justice  and  mercy,  in  and 
through  the  Mediator;  the  one  indeed,  in  his  own  proper 
person,  and  the  other  towards  those  for  whom  he  was  surety, 
hath  declared  himself. 

But  while  Socinus  despised  and  set  at  nought  him  and 
his  grace,  is  it  to  be  wondered  at,  if  he  '  became  vain  in  his 
imaginations,  and  that  his  foolish  heart  was  darkened?' 

For  what  need  I  say  more  ?  doth  not  God  exercise  su- 
preme and  infinite  mercy  towards  us  miserable  and  lost  sin- 
ners, in  pardoning  our  sins  through  Christ?  Have  we  de- 
served any  such  thing,  who,  after  doing  all  that  we  can  do, 
even  when  roused  and  assisted  by  his  grace,  are  still  unpro- 
fitable servants?  Did  we  appoint  a  sacrifice,  that  his  anger 
might  be  averted,  and  that  an  atonement  to  his  justice  might 
be  made,  from  our  own  storehouse,  sheepfold,  or  herd?  Yea, 
when  we  were  enemies  to  him,  alienated  from  his  life,  with- 
out help,  and  without  strength,  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins, 
knowing  of  no  such  thing,  wishing  for,  or  expecting  no  such 
thing,  he  himself '  made  Christ  to  be  sin  for  us  who  knew  no 
sin:  that  he  might  free  us  from  the  wrath  to  come  ;'  that  an 
expiation  being  made  for  our  sins,  we  might  be  presented 
blameless  before  him,  to  the  praise  and  glory  of  his  grace. 
But  whether  he  shewed  the  strictest  justice  and  severity  to- 
wards our  surety,  over  whom  he  exercised  a  most  gracious 
care,  both  on  his  own"*  account,  and  for  our  sakes,  and  whom 
he  did  not  spare,  shall  afterward  be  considered. 

'  Rom.  iii.  23—26. 
^  Beliold  my  servant  whom  I  uphold  ;  mine  elect  in  whom  my  soul  dclighteth ; 
Isa.  xlii.  1. 


450        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

Whether  then,  when  our  opponent  relying  on  these  sub- 
tleties of  his,  concludes,  *  That  there  is  no  justice  in  God 
which  dictates  the  necessity  of  punishing  sin ;  and  that 
therefore,  there  is  no  reason  why  God  carmot  freely  pardon 
the  sins  of  whomsoever  he  may  please,  without  any  satisfac- 
tion received  ;'  and  then,  as  if  he  had  accomplished  a  glo- 
rious achievement,  triumphs  over  the  cross  of  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  be  not  acting  the  part  of  a  most  silly 
trifler,  and  absurd  heretic,  let  the  reader  determine.  But  as 
all  the  arguments  which  he  afterward  uses  against  the  sa- 
tisfaction of  Christ,  have  their  foundation, in  this  most  false 
supposition,  which  the  Scriptures,  as  hath  been  shewn,  so 
often  contradict,  and  on  which  he  always  depends  in  all  his 
disputations ;  whether  those  have  acted  for  the  interest  of 
the  church  of  God,  who  have  voluntarily  surrendered  to  him 
this  impregnable  tower  of  truth,  which  he  hath  in  vain  laid 
siege  to,  that  he  might  with  greater  audacity  carry  on  his  at- 
tacks upon  the  gospel,  is  well  known  to  God.  We,  as  we 
hope,  instructed  by  his  word,  entertain  very  different  senti- 
ments from  theirs  on  this  point. 

But  when  our  opponent  has  come  to  the  conclusion  of 
this  dispute,  he  introduces  many  fictions  about  the  mere 
good-will  of  God,  in  pardoning  sins,  about  his  ceasing  from 
his  right,  without  injury  to  any  one,  about  the  injustice  of 
the  substitution  of  a  surety,  in  the  room  of  sinners  :  all  which 
arguments,  as  they  depend  on  a  false  foundation,  yea,  on  a 
most  base  error,  it  would  be  easy  here  to  shew,  how  vain, 
false,  and  absurd  they  are  ;  unless  we  had  determined,  with 
God's  will,  to  explain  the  doctrine  of  the  satisfaction  of  Je- 
sus Christ,  the  greatest  treasure  of  the  gospel,  and  to  defend 
and  vindicate  it  from  the  unjust  calumnies  of  heretics,  in  the 
proper  place  and  time. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        451 


CHAP.  XII. 

The  progress  of  the  dispute  to  the  theoloo-ians  of  our  own  country.  The  sw 
preme  authority  of  divine  truth.  Who  tlicy  are,  and  ivhat  kind  of  men, 
who  have  gone  into  factions  about  this  matter.  The  Coryphceus  of  the  ad- 
versaries, the  very  illustrious  Twiss,  The  occasion  of  his  puhlishing  his 
opinion.  The  opinion  of  the  Arminians.  The  effects  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
what.  Twiss  acknoivledges  punitory  justice  to  be  natural  to  God.  The 
division  of  the  dispute  ivith  Twiss.  Maccovius's  answers  to  the  arguments 
of  Twiss.     The  plan  of  our  disputation. 

We  come  now  to  those,  and  the  consideration  of  their  opi- 
nion who*"  agreeing  with  us  concernino-  the  satisfaction  of 
Jesus  Christ,  as  revealed  in  the  Scriptures,  yet,  it  being  sup- 
posed that  God  willed  the  salvation  of  sinners,  contend,  that 
the  whole  necessity  of  it  flowed  from  the  most  free-will  of 
God  ;  though  they  by  no  means  deny  sin-avenging  justice 
to  be  natural  to  God. 

But  those  who  maintain  this  opinion  are  so  numerous 
and  respectable,  and  men  who  have  merited  so  highly  of  the 
church  of  God,  that,  although  the  free  man  of  Christ,  and 
taught  to  call  no  man  on  earth  master,  in  matters  of  religion, 
unless  I  had  on  my  side,  not  fewer,  and  equally  famous  men, 
I  should  have  a  religious  scruple,  publicly  to  differ  from 
them.  I  acknowledge,  that  every,  even  the  least  particle  of 
divine  truth  is  furnished  from  heaven  with  authority  towards 
every  disciple  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  the  way,  the  life,  and 
the  truth,  of  holding  it  fast  in  the  love  and  admiration  of  it, 
and  of  enforcing  its  claim,  defence,  and  declaration,  even 
though  the  whole  world  should  rise  up  against  him.  But, 
perhaps,  it  would  be  unbecoming  in  one  who  would  cheer- 
fully enter  a'S  a  disciple,  to  oppose  such  great  learned  men, 
and  those  too  so  well  trained  to  the  field  of  dispute,  unless 
supported  by  the  dignity  and  suffrages  of  others,  not  inferior 
even  to  those  in  merit. 

But  if  modesty  must  be  violated,  all  will  agree,  that  it 
ought  to  be  violated  in  the  cause  of  truth  ;  and  especially, 

*  They  agree,  that  the  satisfaction  by  Christ  is  the  way  of  salvation  revealed  in 
the  Scriptures  ;  but  that  it  is  so,  because  God  willed  it  should  be  so :  and  deny,  that 
there  was  any  necessity  for  s'.icli  a  satisfaction  arising  from  the  nature  of  divine  jus- 
tice. 


452       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

as  I  perceive,  that  the  authority  of  some  theologians  is  of 
so  great  weight  with  many  of  our  countrymen,  that  not 
having  duly  weighed  and  pondered  the  matter,  but  relying 
on  this,  they  go  into  the  opinion,  contrary  to  that  which  we 
have  undertaken  to  defend.  Considering  it  of  importance 
to  weigh  the  arguments  which  these  very  illustrious  men 
have  used,  although  I  knew  myself  not  only  unequal  to  the 
task,  but  that  in  marshalling  the  line  for  such  a  controversy, 
I  am  not  deserving  of  even  a  third  or  fourth  place  from  the 
van,  having  been  only  accustomed  to  the  popular  mode  of 
declaiming ;  however,  I  do  not  fear  to  engage  in  this  under- 
taking, whatever  it  be;  nothing  doubting,  but  that  from  my 
attempt,  though  weak,  the  readers  will  easily  perceive,  that 
the  truth  might  triumph  gloriously,  were  any  one  furnished 
with  better  abilities  to  come  forward  in  its  defence. 

But  here,  first,  of  all  the  antagonists,  and  who  indeed  is 
almost  equal  to  them  all,  the  very  learned  Twiss  opposes 
himself  to  us  ;  concerning  whose  opinion,  in  general,  a  few 
things  are  to  be  premised,  before  we  come  to  the  answers  of 
objections. 

The  consideration  of  Arminius's  opinion,  concerning  the 
efficacy  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and  its  efficiency,  gave  occa- 
sion to  this  learned  man  of  first  publishing  his  own  senti- 
ments. Arminius  contends, '  That  Christ,  by  his  satisfaction 
only  accomplished  this  much,  that  God  now,  consistent  with 
the  honour  of  his  justice  (as  it  had  been  satisfied),  might 
pardon  sinners,  if  he  willed  so  to  do.' 

This  most  absurd  opinion,  so  highly  derogatory  to  divine 
grace,  and  the  merit  of  the  death  of  Christ,  this  illustrious 
man  was  inclined  to  differ  from,  so  far,  that  he  maintained, 
that,  that  consideration,  viz.  '  That  God  could  forgive  sins, 
his  justice  not  opposing  it  (as  having  been  satisfied),  had  no 
place  among  the  effects  of  Christ's  death.' 

But  Arminius  is  the  only  one,  so  far  as  I  know,  among 
our  opponents  of  this  opinion  :  and  he  himself,  in  asserting 
it,  is  scarcely  uniform  and  self  consistent.  I  may  venture  to 
affirm,  that  of  his  followers  there  are  none,  unless  it  be  some 
mean  skulker,  who  swears  by  the  words  of  his  master.  The 
opinion  of  Corvinus,  which  Twiss  afterward  discusses,  is 
plainly  different.  Episcopius,  likewise,  after  Arminius,  the 
Coryphaeus  of  that  cause,  and  by  far  its  most  noble  cliam- 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        453 

pion,  defends  this  very  sentiment  of  this  learned  man.  The 
Pelagian  tribe  have  become  reconciled  with  the  Socinians, 
rather  than  brandish  any  more  that  very  sharp-pointed  wea- 
pon which  cut  the  throat  of  their  own  desperate  cause. 

Nor  can  I  at  all  see  how  this  divine  truth  of  ours  should 
contribute  to  the  support  of  Arrainianism,  as  this  illustrious 
writer  seems  to  signify  :  for  is  he  who  says,  that  Christ  by 
his  death  and  satisfaction  effected  this,  that  God  might 
forgive  sins,  his  justice  not  opposing,  bound  also  to  affirm, 
that  he  accomplished  nothing  farther?  God  forbid.  Yea,  he 
who  without  the  consideration  of  the  oblation  of  Christ,  could 
not  but  punish  sins  (that  oblation  being  made),  cannot  punish 
those  sins  for  which  Christ  offered''  himself.  Yea,  that  he 
is  more  bound  in  strict  right,  and  in  justice,  in  respect  of 
Jesus  Christ,  to  confer  grace  and  glory  on  all  those  for  whom 
he  died,  I  have,  in  its  proper  season,  elsewhere  demon- 
strated. 

The  learned  Twiss  grants,  that  punitory,  or  sin-avenging 
justice,  is  natural  to  God  ;  or  that  it  is  an  essential  attribute 
of  the  divine  nature.  This  he  very  eloquently  maintains; 
and  several  times,  when  it  is  introduced  by  the''  adversaries 
whom  he  selected,  to  refute,  he  gives  his  suffrage  in  its  fa- 
vour. But  what  else  is  that  justice,  but  a  constant  will  of 
punishing  every  sin,  according  to  the  rule  of  his  right?  The 
learned  gentleman  then  grants,  that  an  immutably  constant 
will  of  punishing  every  sin,  is  natural  to  God :  how  then  is 
it  possible  that  he  should  not  punish  it  ?  For  who  hath  op- 
posed his  will  ? 

There  are  two  parts  of  the  Twissian  controversy.  The 
first  is  contained  in  four  principal  arguments,  supported  by 
various  reasons,  in  which  he  attacks  this  sentiment,  viz. 
*  That  God  cannot,  without  a  satisfaction,  forgive  sin.'  In 
the  second,  he  endeavours  to  answer  the  arguments  of  Pis- 
cator  and  Lubbertus,  in  confirmation  of  this  point ;  and  he 
intersperses,  every  where,  according  to  his  custom,  a  variety 
of  new  arguments  on  the  subject.  We  shall  briefly  consider 
what  this  learned  man  hath  done  in  both  parts. 

As  to  what  relates  to  the  first  or  introductory  part,  per- 
haps our  labour  may  appear  superfluous.     The  judicious 

b  Rom.  Hi.  23—25. 
«  Viz.  Piscator  and  Lubbertus. 


454        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

Maccovius  hath,  with  great  success,  performed  this  task  ; 
giving,  by  no  means  trifling,  but  rather,  for  the  most  part, 
very  solid  answers  to  these  four  arguments,  which  Twiss 
calls  his  principal;  and  in  a  very  plain  and  perspicuous  mian- 
ner,  as  was  his  general  custom,  in  all  his  writings. 

But  neither  the  plan  of  our  work  permits  us  to  with- 
draw from  this  undertaking,  though  unequal  to  it;  nor  per- 
haps hath  Maccovius  satisfied  his  readers  in  every  particu- 
lar. Indeed,  some  things  seem  necessary  to  be  added,  that 
this  controversy  with  Twiss  may  occasion  no  trouble  to  any 
one  for  the  future.  This  veteran  leader,  then,  so  well  trained 
to  the  scholastic  field,  going  before,  and  pointing  us  out  the 
way,  we  shall,  with  your  good  leave,  reader,  briefly  try  these 
arguments  by  the  rule  of  Scripture  and  right  reason  ;  and  I 
doubt  not,  but  we  shall  clearly  demonstrate,  to  all  impartial 
judges  of  things,  that  this  learned  man  hath  by  no  means 
proved  what  he  intended. 


CHAP.  XIII. 

Twiss's  first  argument.  Its  answer.  A  trifiing  view  of  the  divine  attri- 
httes.  Whether  God  could,  by  his  absolute  potver  forgive  sins  ivithout  a 
satisfaction:  to  let  sins  pass  unpmiished,  implies  a  contradiction ;  and  that 
twofold.  What  these  contradictions  are.  Whether  God  may  do,  what 
man  may  do?  Whether  ever-y  man  may  renounce  his  right 'i  Whether 
God  cannot  forgive  sins  because  of  his  justice  ?  The  second  argument.  Its 
ayiswer.  Distinctions  of  necessity.  God  doth  no  work,  without  himself, 
from  absolute  necessity.  Conditional  necessity.  Natuial  necessity  twofold- 
God  doth  not  punish  to  the  extent  of  his  power,  but  to  the  extent  of  his 
justice.  God  always  acts  with  a  concomitant  liberty.  An  argument  of  the 
illustrious  Vossius  considered.  God  a  consuming  fire,  but  an  intellectual 
one.  An  exception  of  Twiss's.  Whether  independent  of  the  divine  ap- 
pointment, sin  would  merit  punishment  ?  In  punishment,  what  things  are 
to  be  considered.  The  relation  between  obedience  as  to  rervard,  and  dis- 
obedience as  to  punishment  not  the  same.  The  comparison  between  mercy 
and  justice,  by  Vossius  improperly  instituted. 

Th  e  first  argument  of  this  great  man  is  this  :  'If  God  cannot 
forgive  sins  without  a  satisfaction,  it  is  either  because  he 
cannot,  on  account  of  his  justice,  or  because  he  cannot  by 
his  power  :  but  neither  of  these  can  be  affirmed.' 

Alls.  That  enumeration  of  the  divine  attributes,  as  to  the 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        455 

present  cause,  is  mere  trifling  ;  for  what  God  cannot  do  in 
respect  of  one  attribute,  he  can  do  in  respect  of  none  :  or, 
in  other  words,  that  which  cannot  be  done,  because  of  any- 
one essential  property,  cannot  be  done,  because  of  them  all. 
As  for  instance,  if  there  be  any  thing  which  God  cannot  do, 
in  respect  of  truth,  he  cannot  do  that  in  any  manner,  or  in 
any  respect.  In  the  acts  of  the  divine  will,  purely  free,  the 
case  is  otherwise  ;  for,  in  a  divided  sense,  God  may  do  any 
thing  (that  is,  he  may  create  new  worlds),  v.?hich,  if  a  decree 
of  creating  this,  and  no  other,  be  supposed,  he  could  not  do. 
But  the  objects  presented  to  any  attribute  of  the  divine  na- 
ture, admit  not  of  various  respects,  but  are  in  their  own  kind 
absolutely  necessary  :  therefore,  we  deny  the  minor.  Nei- 
ther in  respect  of  justice,  nor  in  respect  of  power,  can  this 
be  done. 

But  our  learned  antagonist  leads  the  proof  of  it  through 
its  parts ;  and  first,  after  a  marginal  animadversion  on  a  cer- 
tain dream  of  Piscator's  he  affirms,  that  it  cannot  be  main- 
tained, that  God  cannot  forgive  sins  by  his  power  without  a 
satisfaction. 

'  For,'  says  he,  '  if  God  by  his  might,  or  absolute  power, 
cannot  pardon  sin,  then  it  is  absolutely  impossible  for  sin 
to  be  pardoned,  or  not  to  be  punished  ;  therefore,  not  to 
pardon  sin,  consists  of  contradictory  terms  ;  the  contra- 
diction then  ought  to  be  shewn,  as  none  appears  from  the 
formal  terms.  And  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  evident,  that 
man  not  only  can  pardon,  but  that  it  is  his  duty  to  pardon 
his  enemies,  when  they  trangress  against  him.' 

j4}is.  The  non-punishment  of  sin,  implies  a  contradiction ; 
not  indeed  formally,  and  in  the  terms,  but  virtually,  and 
eminently,  in  respect  of  the  thing  itself:  for,  in  the  first  place, 
it  implies,  that  God  is  the  Lord  of  mankind,  by  a  natural 
and  indispensable  right,  but  that  mankind  are  not  subject 
to  him,  neither  as  to  obedience,  nor  as  to  punishment; 
which  would  be  the  direct  case,  if  sin  should  pass  with  im- 
punity. For  that  natural  and  necessary  dependance  being 
cut  off  (which  also  in  another  respect  is  moral),  which  ac- 
cords to  a  rational  creature  in  respect  of  its  Creator  and 
supreme  Lord,  which  really  comes  to  pass  by  means  of  sin, 
it  cannot  be  renewed,  or  made  amends  for,  but  by  punish- 
ment.    In  the  second  place,  to  hate  sin,  that  is,  to  will  to 


456        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

punish  it,  and  not  to  hate  sin,  to  will  to  let  it  pass  un- 
punished, are  manifestly  contradictory. 

If  you  say  that  God  hath  it  in  his  power,  not  to  hate  sin, 
you  say  that  he  hath  the  contrary  in  his  power,  that  is,  that 
he  can  love  sin  ;  for  if  he  hate  sin,  of  his  free-will,  he  may 
will  the  contrary.  For  the  divine  will  is  not  so  determinately 
inclined  towards  any  secondary  object,  by  any  thing  in  itself, 
that  can  justly  oppose  its  inclination  to  its  opposite  ;  this 
Scotus  maintains,  and  Twiss  agrees  with  him.  But  to  will 
good,  and  to  love  justice,  are  not  less  natural  to  God,  than 
to  be  himself.  Here  is  then  a  double  contradiction  in  that 
assertion  of  this  very  learned  man,  viz.  '  That  God  can  for- 
give sin,  absolutely,  without  any  satisfaction  received.' 

'  But  it  is  manifest,'  says  he,  *  that  man  not  only  can  par- 
don, but  that  it  is  his  duty  to  pardon  his  enemies,  and  there- 
fore, this  does  not  imply  a  contradiction.' 

Ans.  The  supposition  is  denied,  that  God  may  do,  what 
man  may  do.  That  learned  man  raises  this  objection  him- 
self, that  man  may  sin,  which  God  cannot  do,  and  at  great 
length,  and  with  much  erudition,  explains  away  this  exam- 
ple. But  as  this  instance  of  Twiss's  is  not  quite  satisfactory 
to  us,  we  think  proper  to  proceed  in  a  different  manner. 

I  say,  then,  in  the  first  place,  that  divine  and  human  for- 
giveness are  plainly  of  a  different  kind  ;  the  forgiveness  of 
man  only  respects  the  hurt,  the  forgiveness  of  God  respects 
the  guilt.  Man  pardons  sins,  so  far  as  any  particular  in- 
jury hath  been  done  himself;  God  pardons  sin,  as  the  good 
of  the  ..universe  is  injured.  Secondly,  Neither  is  it  in  the 
power  of  any  man  to  let  sins  pass  unpunished,  yea,  of  none 
absolutely,  to  whom  the  right  of  punishing  is  competent ; 
for,  although  a  private  person  may  recede  from  his  right, 
which,  for  the  most  part,  is  of  charity  ;  yet  it  is,  by  no  means 
allowed  to  a  public  person  to  renounce  his  right,  which  is 
a  right  of  government,  especially  if  that  renunciation  should 
in  any  way  turn  out  to  the  hurt  of  the  public.  In  the  third 
place,  then,  I  say  that,  that  instance  is  nothing  to  the  pur- 
pose :  for  although  a  private  person  may  at  certain  times 
renounce  his  right  and  dominion  in  certain  cases,  and  ought 
to  do  so,  it  doth  not  follow  from  that,  that  God,  whose  right 
and  dominion  is  natural  and  indispensable,  and  which  he 
cannot  renounce  unless  he  deny  himself,  can  do  the  same. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       457 

In  the  fourth  place,  the  non-punishment  of  sin,  is  an  injury 
to  the  universe;  for  the  glory  of  divine  justice  would  be  af- 
fronted with  impunity. 

Our  celebrated  antagonist  proceeds  to  the  consideration 
of  divine  justice  :  *  But  neither,'  says  he,  '  can  it  be  consist- 
ently said,  that  God  cannot  do  this  because  of  his  justice  ; 
if  it  be  supposed,  that  he  can  do  it  by  his  power.'  But 
Scotus  reasons  with  more  judgment  and  accuracy  on  this 
point.  'The  divine  will  is  not  so  inclined  towards  any  se- 
condary object,  by  any  thing  in  itself,'  says  he,  *  that  can 
oppose  its  being  justly  inclined  towards  its  opposite,  in  the 
same  manner  as  without  contradiction  it  may  will  its  oppo- 
site ;  otherwise,  it  may  will  absolutely  and  not  justly,  which 
is  inconsistent  with  divine  perfection.' 

Jns.  We  hiaintain  that  God,  from  his  nature  cannot  do 
this ;  and  therefore,  that  he  cannot  either  by  his  power  or 
his  justice ;  and  as  our  learned  antagonist  produces  no  argu- 
ment to  prove  that  God  can  do  it  without  resistance  from 
his  justice,  but  what  flows  from  this  false  supposition,  that 
he  can  do  it  by  his  power,  it  is  not  necessary  to  give  our- 
selves any  trouble  on  this  head.  But  to  Scotus,  we  answer: 
the  divine  will  may  incline  to  things  opposite,  in  respect  of 
the  egresses  of  all  those  divine  attributes  which  constitute 
and  create  objects  to  themselves  ;  but  not  in  respect  of  those 
attributes  which  have  no  egress  towards  their  objects,  but 
upon  a  condition  supposed  :  as  for  instance,  God  may  justly 
speak  or  not  speak  with  man :  but  it  being  supposed  that  he 
wills  to  speak,  the  divine  will  cannot  be  indifferent  whether 
he  speak  truth  or  not.  So  much  for  his  first  principal  ar- 
gument. 

The  second  is  this  : 

*  If  God  cannot  let  sin  pass  unpunished,  then  he  must 
punish  it  from  an  absolute  necessity :  but  this  no  one  can 
maintain  consistent  with  reason.' 

This  consequence  the  learned  doctor  supposes,  without 
any  argument  to  support  it :  but  we  deny  the  consequence, 
nor  will  he  ever  be  able  to  prove,  that  there  is  no  other  kind  of 
necessity  but  an  absolute  necessity.  There  is  also  a  neces- 
sity arising  from  a  supposed  condition,  and  which  deprives 
not  the  agent  of  a  concomitant  liberty.  God  could  not  but 
create  the  world  ;  but  God  did  not  create  the  world  from  an 

VOL.   IX.  2  n 


458        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

absolute  necessity,  although  it  was  necessary,  upon  a  sup- 
position, that  it  should  be  created.  It  is  necessary  that 
God  should  speak  truly,  but  he  doth  not  speak  from  an  ab- 
solute necessity ;  but  it  being  supposed  that  he  wills  to 
speak,  it  is  impossible,  that  he  should  not  speak  truly.  We 
say,  therefore,  that  God  cannot  but  punish  sin,  or,  that  he 
necessarily  punishes  sin,  not,  however,  from  an  absolute  ne- 
cessity of  nature,  as  a  father  begets  a  son,  but  upon  the  sup- 
positions'* before-mentioned,  by  a  necessity  which  excludes 
an  antecedent  indifference,  but  not  a  concomitant  liberty  in 
the  agent;  for  in  punishing  sins  he  acts  by  volition,  and  with 
understanding. 

But  that  necessity  (you  will  say),  of  what  kind  soever  it 
be,  flows  from  the  nature  of  God,  not  his  will  or  decree.  But 
all  necessity  of  nature  seems  to  be  absolute.  I  acknowledge, 
indeed,  that  all  necessity  of  nature,  considered  in  the  first 
act,  and  thing  signified,  is  absolute  in  its  kind ;  but  in  the 
second  act,  and  in  its  exercise,  it  is  not  so.  The  reader  will 
easily  perceive  now,  that  our  very  learned  antagonist  had 
no  reason  for  freely  supposing  that  consequence,  which  I 
reckon  the  very  lowest  of  all  the  devices  he  has  fallen  upon. 

*  If  then,'  says  he,  '  God  must  punish  sin  from  a  natural 
necessity,  he  must  necessarily  punish  it,  to  the  extent  of  his 
power  ;  but  this,  with  great  accuracy,  he  shews  to  be  ab- 
surd, by  a  variety  of  arguments.' 

Ajis.  Maccovius  hath,  sometime  ago,  very  -clearly  an- 
swered this  reasoning.  We  reject  his  consequence,  as  built 
upon  a  false  supposition.  For  that  necessity,  from  which 
God  punisheth  sin,  does  not  require  that  he  should  punish 
it  to  the  extent  of  his  power,  but  so  far  as  is  just.  We  do 
not  conceive  God  to  be  a  senseless  inanimate  agent,  as  if  he 
acted  from  principles  of  nature,  after  a  natural  manner, 
without  a  concomitant  liberty  ;  for  he  doth  all  things  freely 
with  understanding  and  by  volition,  even  those  things  which, 
by  supposition,  he  doeth  necessarily,  according  to  what  his 
most  holy  nature  requires. 

The  argument  which  the  celebrated  Vossius  uses  against 
our  opinion,  is  of  no  greater  weight.  '  Every  agent  (says 
that  very  learned  man),  that  acts  naturally,  acts  upon  an  ob- 

a  Viz.  That  he  willed  to  create  a  rational  being,  and  to  permit  it  to  transgress  the 
law  of  its  creation. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       459 

ject  naturally  receptive  of  its  action:  wherefore,  if  to  punish 
were  natural,  viz.  in  that  acceptation  which  necessity  carries 
with  it,  such  action  could  not  pass  from  the  person  of  a  sin- 
ner to  another  person.' 

But  this  learned  man  is  mistaken,  when  he  imagines  that 
we  affirm  God  to  be  such  a  natural  agent,  as  must,  without 
sense,  and  immediately  operate  upon  the  object  that  is  re- 
ceptive of  it,  in  a  manner  altogether  natural,  and  without 
any  concomitant  liberty,  that  is,  without  any  free  act  of  un- 
derstanding or  volition.  For  although  God  be  '  a  consuming 
fire,'  he  is  an  intellectual  one.  Nor  is  a  sinner  alone  an  object 
properly  receptive  of  the  exercise  of  God's  vindicatory  jus- 
tice, as  he  hath  committed  the  transgressions  in  his  own 
person  ;  for  antecedent  to  every  act  of  that  justice,  properly 
so  called,  in  respect  of  the  elect,  God  appointed  a  surety, 
and  this  surety  being  appointed,  and  all  the  sins  of  the  elect 
laid  upon  him,  he  in  their  room  and  stead,  is  the  proper  ob- 
ject of  this  vindicatory  justice,  so  far  as  relates  to  their 
sins. 

But  Twiss  thus  replies, '  If  God  punish  as  far  as  he  can, 
with  justice,  that  is,  as  far  as  sin  deserves  ;  then  it  must  be 
either  as  far  as  sin  deserves,  according  to  the  free  constitu- 
tion of  God  ;  or  without  any  regard  to  the  divine  constitu- 
tion. If  according  to  the  divine  constitution,  this  is  nothing 
else  but  to  assert,  that  God  punishes  not  so  far  as  he  can ; 
but  so  far  as  he  wills.  If  without  any  regard  to  the  divine 
constitution,  then  without  the  divine  constitution,  sin  so  de- 
serves punishment,  that  God  ought  to  punish  sin,  because 
of  his  justice :  but  I  conclude  this  to  be  false  in  this  man- 
ner :  if  disobedience  deserve  punishment  in  this  manner,  that 
is,  without  the  divine  constitution  ;  therefor^  obedience  will 
also,  in  like  manner,  deserve  a  reward,  without  the  divine 
constitution ;  for  no  reason  can  be  shewn,  that  any  one 
should  maintain  that  even  angels  have  merited,  by  their  obe- 
dience, that  God  should  reward  them  with  celestial  glory.' 

But  although  these  arguments  are  specious,  yet,  strictly 
considered,  they  have  no  greater  weight  than  those  already 
discussed;  for  in  the  punishment  of  sin,  two  things  are  to  be 
considered  :  1.  The  punishment  itself,  so  far  as  it  is  in  its 
own  nature  something  grievous  and  troublesome  to  the  crea- 
ture, and  proper  to  recover  the  violated  right  of  God.     In 

2  h2 


460        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

this  respect,  we  say,  that  sin  merits  punishment  antecedently 
to  every  free  act  of  the  divine  will,  or  to  the  divine  consti- 
tution :  or,  if  you  would  rather  have  it  thus  expressed  ;  that 
it  is  just  that  God  should  inflict  punishment,  considered  as 
such  on  the  transgressor,  without  regard  to  any  free  consti- 
tution ;  for,  if  without  regard  to  such  a  constitution,  sin  be 
sin,  and  evil,  evil ;  and  unless  it  be  so,  to  hate  the  greatest 
and  best  of  beings,  may  be  the  highest  virtue,  and  to  love 
him  the  greatest  vice  ;  why  may  not  punishment  be  due  to 
it,  without  regard  to  such  a  consideration?  2.  In  pu- 
nishment, the  mode,  time,  and  degree,  are  especially  to  be 
considered  :  in  respect  of  these,  God  punishes  sin  accord- 
ing to  the  divine  constitution ;  for  the  justice  of  God,  only 
demanding  punishment  in  general,  as  including  in  it  the  na- 
ture of  punishment,  nothing  hinders  but  that  God  should 
freely  appoint  the  mode  and  degree  of  it :  he  punishes  them 
because  it  is  just  that  he  should  do  so;  and  consequently, 
indispensably  necessary :  he  punishes,  in  one  mode  or  in 
another,  in  one  degree  or  in  another  ;  because,  according  to 
his  wisdom  he  hath  determined  freely  so  to  do.  What  we 
understand  by  modes  and  degrees  of  punishment,  shall  be  af- 
terward explained. 

*  But  (says  our  celebrated  antagonist),  if  disobedience 
thus  deserves  punishment,  why  should  not  obedience  in  like 
manner  deserve  a  reward  ?  for  no  reason  to  the  contrary  can 
be  assigned.'  I  wish  this  learned  man  had  not  so  expressed 
himself;  for  he  will  never  be  able  to  prove  that  the  relation 
between  obedience,  as  to  reward,  and  disobedience,  as  to 
punishment,  is  the  same ;  for  between  obedience  and  the  re- 
ward, there  intervenes  no  natural  obligation  :  God  is  brought 
under  an  obligation  to  no  one,  for  any  kind  of  obedience ; 
*  for  after  we  have  done  all,  we  are  still  unprofitable  servants.' 
But  God's  right,  that  rational  creatures  should  be  subject  to 
him,  either  by  obedience  or  a  vicarious  punishment,  is  in- 
dispensable. In  a  word,  obedience  is  due  to  God,  in  such 
a  manner,  that  from  the  nature  of  the  thing,  he  can  be 
debtor  to  none,  in  conferring  rewards  :  but  disobedience 
would  destroy  all  dependance  of  the  creature  upon  God,  un- 
less a  recompense  be  made  by  punishment. 

The  celebrated  Vossius  again  reasons  improperly,  in  the 
passage  before  quoted,  from  a  comparison  made  between 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        461 

justice  and  mercy.  'The  question  is  not/  says  he  'whether 
it  be  just  that  a  satisfaction  be  received  ;  but  whether  it  be 
unjust  that  it  should  not  be  received  :  for  it  doth  not  follow, 
that  if  God  be  merciful  in  doing  one  thing  or  another,  that 
he  would  be  unmerciful  in  not  doing  it.'  I  acknowledge,  that 
it  does  not  follow  ;  for  although  mercy  be  natural  to  God,  as 
to  the  habit,  yet  because  there  is  no  natural  obligation  be- 
ty/een  it  and  its  proper  object,  it  is,  as  to  all  its  acts  entirely 
free:  but  the  nature  of  the  thing,  about  which  it  is  employed, 
is  not  indispensable ;  as  we  have  shewn  before  to  be  the 
case  with  regard  to  justice.  So  much  for  the  learned  Twiss's 
second  argument,  with  the  consideration  of  it. 


CHAP.  XIV. 

Twiss^s  third  argument.  A  dispensation  with  regard  to  the  punishment  of 
sin,  what,  and  of  what  kind.  The  nature  of  punishment,  and  its  circum- 
stances. The  instance  of  this  learned  opponent  refuted.  The  consider- 
ations of  rewarding  and  punishing,  different.  How  long,  and  imvhat 
sense  God  can  dispense  with  tlie  punishment  due  to  sin.  God  the  suprane 
governor  of  the  Jewish  polity:  also,  the  Lord  of  all.  The  fourth  argu- 
ment ofTwiss.  The  answer.  Whether  God  can  inflict  punishment  on  an 
innocent  person.  In  what  sense  God  is  more  willing  to  do  acts  of  kindness 
than  to  punish.  What  hind  of  willingness  that  assertion  respects.  The 
conclusion  of  the  answer  to  Tuiss's principal  arguments. 

The  third  argument  in  this  :  '  God  can  inflict  a  milder  pu- 
nishment than  sin  deserves  ;  therefore,  he  can  by  his  abso- 
lute power,  suspend  the  punishment  altogether.' 

Alls.  I  answer,  that  the  punishment  which  a  sin  deserves, 
may  be  considered  in  a  twofold  point  of  view.  1.  As  by 
means  of  it  God  compels  to  order  a  disobedient  creature,  that 
hath  cast  off  its  dependance  on  his  supreme  and  natural  do- 
minion, in  such  a  manner  that  his  will  may  be  done  with 
that  creature  that  is  itself  unwilling  to  doit:  and  in  this 
point  of  view  he  caunot  inflict  a  more  mild  punishment  than 
sin  deserves.  Yea,  properly  speaking,  in  this  respect  it 
cannot  be  said  to  admit  of  degrees,  either  milder  or  more 
severe.  And  in  this  sense  alone  we  deny  the  foregoing  pro- 
position. 2.  It  may  be  considered  in  this  other  point  of 
view,  viz.  as  God,  for  the  greater  manifestation  of  his  glory. 


462        A    DISSERTATION    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

hath  assigned  to  it  modes,  degrees,  and  other  circumstances ; 
but  if  punishment  be  considered  in  this  view,  we  deny  the 
sequel  :*  for  though  it  be  granted  that  he  exerciseth  liberty 
as  to  the  modes  and  degrees,  as  these  flow  from  the  free  ap- 
pointment of  God,  it  doth  not  follow,  that  the  puni&hment 
itself,  so  far  as  the  nature  of  punishment  is  preserved  in  it, 
and  which  takes  its  rise  from  the  natural  justice  of  God,  can 
be  altogether  dispensed  with. 

What  says  our  learned  antagonist  to  this"?  He  supposes 
the  author  of  the  supplement  his  opponent,  and  discusses 
his  opinion  in  a  variety  of  subtle  reasonings,  in  his  ans^wer 
concerning  the  extent  and  different  degrees  of  justice.  But 
he  confesses  that  these  have  no  relation  to  Piscator :  and,  as 
they  are  of  no  avail  to  the  argument,  we  tlierefore  pass  over 
the  consideration  of  them. 

But  this  learned  gentlemen  has  still  something  to  oppose 
to  our  reasoning;  for  he  thus  proceeds:  'God  may  reward 
beyond  merit ;  therefore,  he  may  punish  less  than  what  is 
merited.'  But  this  reason  is  evidently  of  no  force  :  for,  be- 
sides that  arguments  from  opposites  do  not  always  hold 
good  in  theology,  as  hath  been  shewn  in  various  instances 
by  Maccovius,  we  have  before  demonstrated  at  large,  that 
the  relation  between  remunerating  grace  and*"  punitory  jus- 
tice is  not  the  same.  Moreover,  these  considerations  all 
along  arise  not  from  the  nature  of  punishment,  but  from  its 
degrees  ;  about  which  we  have  no  controversy  ;  for  we  have 
never  said  that  God,  in  punishing  sins,  acts  without  any 
concomitant  liberty,  which  respects  those  degrees. 

But,  forasmuch  as  'Socinians  argue  from  the  divine  dis- 
pensations with  regard  to  the  punishment  of  sins,  to  the  free 
pardon  of  them  without  any  satisfaction,  we  must  say  a  few 
things  in  reply  to  this  argument  of  our  learned  antagonist, 
as  he  seems  pretty  near  akin  to  them ;  and  as  they  are  so 
very  eager  in  wresting  every  thing  to  favour  their  own  side 
of  the  question. 

The  divine  dispensation,  then,  with. the  punishment  of 

^  Viz.  That  God,  by  his  absolute   power,  can  suspend  the  punishment  of  sin  al- 
together. 

•>  That  is,  their  relation  to  their  objects,  or  their  qualities  considered  in  this  point 
of  view,  is  diftcrent :  divine  justice  necessarily  operates  towards  its  object  to  punish 
the  sinner, otherwise  it  would  not  be  justice;   but  as  no  creature  can  merit  any  thing 
of  God,  it  depends  on  God's  good  pleasure  whether  he  bestow  rewards  or  not. 
«  Creliius,'  Of  the  true  Religion,'  p.  308. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        463 

sins,  respects  either  temporary  or  eternal  punishment ;  but 
a  temporary  punishment  may  be  considered  either  in  respect 
of  monitory  threats,  or  of  a  peremptory  decree,  and  both  in 
respect  of  the  time  of  the  infliction,  and  of  the  degrees  in  the 
punishment  to  be  inflicted.     But  God,  as  the  avenger  of  sin, 
is  considered  in  Scripture  in  a  twofold  point  of  view.     1.  As 
the  Legislator  and  supreme  Lord  of  the  Jews,  and  their  com- 
monwealth ;  whose  state,  from  that  circumstance,  Josephus 
calls  a  theocracy  :  or,    2.  As  the  supreme  Lord  and  just 
Judge  of  the  universe.     If  these  considerations  be  properly 
attended  to,  the  subtleties  of  Crellius  are  easily  dissolved  : 
for  God,  as  the  Legislator  ai)d  supreme  Kuler  of  the  Jewish 
republic,  oft-times  dispensed  with  temporary  punishments,  as 
denounced  in  his  threatenings  ;  both  as  to  the  place,  degree, 
and  time,  of  their  execution  :  but  God,  as  the  supreme  Lord, 
and  just  Judge  of  the  universe,  doth  not  dispense  with  the 
eternal  punishment  of  sin,  to  be  inflicted  at  the  proper  and 
appointed  time.    The  learned  Twiss's  fourth  argument  re- 
mains only  to  be  considered. 

'  God  is  able,'  says  he,  *  to  inflict  any  torture,  however 
great,  even  an  infernal  one,  upon  any  person,  without  the 
consideration  of  any  demerit;  therefore,  he  is  also  able,  not- 
withstanding the  greatest  demerit,  to  suspend  the  greatest 
punishment  whatever.  The  antecedent  hath  been  proved  : 
the  consequence  from  it  is  notorious ;  as  God  is  more  willing 
to  do  good  than  to  punish.' 

Alls.   1.  We  have  before  observed,  that  this   mode  of 
reasoning  does  not  always  hold  good  in  theology.     Neither, 
however,  in  the  second  place,  are  these  opposites,  viz.  to  in- 
flict torture,  and  to  suspend   punishment :  for  torture  and 
punishment  are  different:  but  to  inflict  an  infernal  punish- 
ment upon  any  innocent  person  is  a  thing  impossible ;  for 
punishment  supposes  a  transgression  ;  and  therefore,  not  to 
inflict  punishment  upon  a  guilty  person,  is  also  impossible ; 
for  transgression,  from  the  very  nature  of  the  thing,  requires 
punishment:  but  it  is   astonishing,  that  this  learned  writer 
.should  insist  on  the  proof  of  the  sequel,  viz.  'That  God  is 
more  willing  to  do  good  than  to  punish ;'  as  he  hath  many 
times,  by  very  strong  arguments,  disallowed  the  natural  in- 
clination of  the  Deity  towards  the  good  of  the  creature  :  nor 
will  he  ever  be  able  to  prove,  that  God  is  inclined  to  bestow 


464         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

such  kind  of  benefits  on  a  sinful  creature,  as  are  opposite  to 
the  punishment  due  to  sin,  without  regard  to  Christ  and 
his  satisfaction:  but  that  diiference  respects  a  will,  com- 
manding and  exhorting  according  to  morality,  not  decreeing 
or  acting  naturally. 

And  these  are  what  this  learned  writer  calls  his  principal 
arguments  ;  in  which  he  contends  that  God  can  let  sin  pass 
unpunished,  without  any  satisfaction.  I  hope,  that  impar- 
tial judges,  however  great  respect  they  may  have  for  the 
name  of  Twiss,  will  not  be  offended,  that  I  have  made  these 
short  answers  to  his  arguments,  as  certainly  they  have  been 
conducted  without  violence  or  sarcasm,  and  by  no  means 
from  any  weak  desire  of  attacking  so  very  illustrious  a  man, 
for  whose  many  and  great  qualities,  none  can  have  a  greater 
respect.  But  I  have  engaged  in  this  task  from  an  earnest 
desire  of  preserving,  undiminished,  the  glory  of  divine  jus- 
tice, and  of  establishing  the  necessity  of  the  satisfaction  of 
Christ,  lest  the  Socinians  should  wrest  to  their  purpose  the 
arguments  of  this  learned  man ;  on  the  principal  of  which 
they  place  a  principal  dependance,  and  by  which  they  ac- 
knowledge that  they  have  been  induced  to  adopt  heretical 
opinions. 

Our  very  learned  antagonist  adds  other  arguments  to 
these  ;  some  of  which  have  been  satisfactorily  answered  by 
Maccovius ;  others  belong  not,  according  to  our  view  of  it, 
to  the  present  controversy  ;  and  others  will  come  to  be  con- 
sidered in  our  vindication  of  the  arguments  of  Piscator  and 
Lubbertus,  impugned  by  this  celebrated  writer,  of  which  we 
shall  take  a  short  review;  and  therefore  shall  not  now  enter 
into  any  particular  consideration  of  them. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON'    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         465 


CHAP.  XV. 

The  defence  of  Sibrandus  Lubbertus  against  Twiss.  The  agreement  of 
these  very  learned  men  in  a  point  cf  the  utmost  importance.  A  vindica- 
tion of  his  argument  from  God's  hatred  against  sin.  Liberality  and  jus- 
tice different.  A  sentiment  of  Lubbei-tus  undeservedly  charged  with 
atheism.  What  kind  of  necessity  of  opej-ation  we  suppose  in  God:  this 
pointed  out.  The  sophistical  reasoning  of  this  learned  writer.  How  God 
is  bound  to  manifest  any  jiroperty  of  his  nature.  The  reasons  of  Lubber- 
tus and  Twiss's  objections  to  the  same,  considered.  That  passage  of  the 
apostle,  Rom.  i.  32.  considered  and  vindicated.  His  ^mode  of  disputing 
rejected.  The  force  of  the  argument  from  Rom,  i.  32.  The  righteous 
judgment  of  God,  what.  Our  federal  representative,  and  those  repre- 
sented by  him,  are  one  mystical  body.  An  answer  to  Twiss's  arguments ; 
Exod.  xxxiv.  7.  The  learned  writer's  answer  respecting  that  passage. 
A  defence  of  the  passage.  Punitory  justice  a  name  of  God.  Whether 
those  for  whom  Christ  hath  made  satisfaction,  ought  to  be  called  guilty. 
Psal.  V.  5 — 7.  the  sense  of  that  passage  considered.  From  these  three 
passages  the  argmnent  is  one  and  the  same.  Lubbertus's  argument  from 
the  definition  of  justice,  weiglicd.  How  vindicatory  justice  is  distin- 
guished from  universal.  The  natures  of  liberality  and  justice  evidently 
different.  Punishment  belongs  to  God.  In  inflicting  punishment,  God 
vindicates  his  right.  Will  and  necessity,  whether  they  he  opposite.  The 
end  of  the  defence  of  Lubbertus. 

The  learned  Twiss,  when  about  to  reply  to  the  arguments 
of  Lubbertus,  brings  forward  two  assertions  of  his ;  to  the 
first  of  which  he  consents,  but  not  to  the  latter.  The  first 
maintains,  'corrective  justice  to  be  essential  to  God  ;'  which 
he  approves  :  and  herein  we  congratulate  this  very  learned 
man,  that  thus  far,  at  least,  he  assents  to  the  truth  ;  and  in 
so  doing  hath  given  cause  to  the  Socinians  to  grieve.  But, 
'  that  it  is  natural  to  God  to  hate  and  punish  sin ;'  which  is 
Lubbertus's  second  assertion,  he  denies  :  the  nicety  of  his 
discrimination  here  is  truly  astonishing  :  for  what  is  God's 
hatred  against  sin,  but  this  corrective  justice  ?  How  then  is 
it  possible  that  that  justice  should  be  natural  to  God,  and 
the  hatred  of  sin  not  so  likewise  ?  I  very  well  know  that  the 
learned  man  will  not  allow  that  there  is  any  such  affection 
as  hatred-in  God,[properly  so  called.  What  is  it  then  else 
than  the  constant  will  of  punishing  sin  ?  but  that  is  the  very 
vindicatory  justice  of  which  we^  treat.     Besides,  if  to  hate 

*  Viz.  Twiss's. 


466         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

sin  be  not  natural  to  God,  then  it  is  a  thing  free  and  indif- 
ferent to  him  :  he  may  then  not  hate  it ;  he  may,  according 
to  the  opinion  of  Scotus,  formerly  mentioned  as  approved 
by  Twiss,  will  its  contrary  ;  that  is,  he  may  love  and  approve 
of  sin,  though  *he  be  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  iniquity.' 
But,  Avith  good  reason,  he  farther  maintains,  that  '  mercy  is 
essential  to  God,  and  yet  that  it  is  not  necessary  that  he 
should  shew  mercy  to  any  one  ;  but  of  hk  free  good  plea- 
sure he  sheweth  mercy  to  whomsoever  he  sheweth  mercy.' 
We  have  again  and  again  before  shewn  that  justice  and 
mercy,  in  respect  of  their  exercise,  are  diiferent :  God  is 
under  no  obligation  to  exercise  mercy  towards  anyone; 
but  he  owes  it  to  himself  to  preserve  his  own  natural  right 
and  dominion  over  his  rational  creatures :  and  the  learned 
gentleman  cannot  shew  that  there  is  any  such  obligation, 
arising  from  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself,  between  remune- 
rating justice  and  liberality,  on  which  he  next  insists,  and 
their  objects,  as  there  is  between  corrective  justice  and  its 
objects. 

But  he  brings  a  grievous  charge,  no  less  than  even  that 
of  atheism,  against  this  sentiment  of  Lubbertus ;  and  on  a 
double  account:  for,  first,  he  says,  *  that  hence  it  follows, 
that  God  is  a  necessary,  and  not  a  free  agent :'  and  he  calls 
that  proposition,  a  spreading  gangrene.  1.  But  theologians 
agree,  and  without  any  risk  of  atheism,  that  God  is,  in  re- 
spect of  his  operations,  within  himself,  a  necessary  agent. 
2.  If  it  be  necessary  that  God  should  do  'any  tiling  upon 
some  condition  supposed,  is  he  therefore  to  be  accounted  a 
necessary,  and  not  a  free  agent  ?  Perhaps  never  any  one 
hath  made  God  more  a  necessary  agent,  than  Twiss  himself 
doth  ;  for  he  every  where  maintains,  that  upon  the  supposi- 
tion of  a  decree,  it  is  necessary  that  God  should  do  all 
things  in  conformity  to  it:  which,  however,  I  do  by  no 
means  mention  as  finding  fault  with.  Upon  the  supposition 
of  a  decree,  for  instance,  God  could  not  but  create  the  world  ; 
but  is  he  therefore  to  be  called  a  necessary  agent  in  the 
creation  of  the  world  ?  by  no  means.  But  you  will  say, 
'  that  necessity  flows  from  the  free-will  of  God ;  but  that 
which  you  dream  of,  arises  from  the  principles  of  his  nature; 
and  therefore,  how  widely  different !'  I  willingly  grant,  in- 
deed, that  the  decree  of  creating  the  world,  flowed  from  the 


A     DISSKUTATION     ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         467 

free-will,  of  God  ;  but  this  being  supposed,  it  was  necessary 
to  the  divine  nature,  which  is  immutable,  that  it  should  be 
created.  Nor  do  we  ascribe  any  other  kind  of  natural  ne- 
cessity to  God  in  punishing  sins.  The  decree  of  creating 
rational  creatures  bound  to  render  him  obedience,  and  so 
far  liable  to  his  right  and  dominion  ;  and  that  he  willed  to 
permit  these  creatures  to  transgress  the  law  of  their  creation, 
flowed  merely  from  his  free-will ;  but  these  things  being 
once  supposed,  it  necessarily  belongs  to  the  divine  nature, 
as  it  is  just,  to  punish  those  who  so  transgress  :  but  that 
God  exerciseth  a  concomitant  liberty  in  punishing  them,  we 
have  several  times  allowed ;  and  we  have  no  doubt,  but  if 
this  be  atheism,  it  is  also  Christianity. 

Secondly.  *  Is  God  at  all  bound,'  says  our  very  learned 
antagonist, '  or  in  any  manner  obliged  to  manifest  his  justice, 
more  than  to  manifest  his  mercy,  munificence,  and  liberality? 
It  is  evident  that  God  is  not  bound  to  exercise  any  one  pro- 
perty whatever,  more  than  another :   wherefore,  either  all 
things  must  be  said  to  be  necessarily  performed  by  God  ; 
and  even  that  the  world  was  not  made  of  his  free-will,  but 
from  a  natural  necessity  ;  or  that  all  things  have  been,  and 
still  are,  freely  done  by  God.'     But  besides  that  this  rea- 
soning is  sophistical,  it  injures  not  our  cause.     The  whole 
matter  may  be  clearly  explained  in  one  word,  God  is  not  ab- 
solutely bound  to  manifest  any  property  of  his  nature,  much 
less  one  more  than  another,  for  this  respects  the  free  pur- 
pose of  God;  but  upon  a  condition  supposed,  God  may  be 
Hiore  bound  to  exercise  one  property  than  another ;  for  this 
relates  to  its  exercise.     But  none  of  us  have  said  that  it  is 
necessary  that  God  should  punish  sin,  because  he  is  neces- 
sarily bound  to  demonstrate  his  justice;  for  in  this  very 
thing  he  demonstrates  his**  justice  ;  but  it  is  necessary  that 
he  should  punish  because  he  is  just.     The  learned  writer 
then  confounds  the  decree  of  manifesting  the  glory  of  the 
divine  properties,  to  which  God  is  absolutely  bound  by  none 
of  his  properties,  with  the  exercise  of  these  properties  upon 
a  condition  supposed  ;  which  we  have  endeavoured  to  prove 
to  be  necessary,  with  respect  to  vindicatory  justice. 

In  what  sense  all  things  are  said  to  be  done  by  God  ne- 
cessarily, though  he  be  a  free  agent,  hath  been  already  ex- 

>>  Rom.  i.  18. 


468       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

plained.  By  these  arguments,  then,  whereby  he  endeavours 
to  weigh  down  our  opinion  with  prejudices,  it  is  evident  that 
our  antagonist  hath  nothing  availed  himself:  let  us  now  see 
whether  he  hath  been  more  successful  in  his  replies  to  Lub- 
bertus,  than  in  his  system  of  opposition. 

He  briefly  states  five  arguments  of  Lubbertus,  to  each  of 
which  he  answers  in  order. 

That  passage  of  the  apostle  to  the  Romans,  chap.  i.  32. 
'Who  knowing  the  judgment,'  i.  e.  that  the  just,  right,  or 
righteous  judgment  of  God  is,  '  that  they  who  do  such 
things  are  worthy  of  death,'  is  quoted  as  a  proof  of  this  doc- 
trine, by  Lubbertus.  Twiss  thus  replies  :  '  I  acknowledge, 
that  they  who  commit  such  things,  are  worthy  of  death  : 
but  it  by  no  means  follows  from  this,  that  it  is  necessary 
that  God  should  punish  them  ;  which  I  shall  demonstrate  by 
a  twofold  argument ;  for  if  that  followed,  it  would  follow 
that  they  who  commit  such  things  must  necessarily  be  pu- 
nished ;  but  the  elect,  because  of  sin,  are  worthy  of  death  ; 
but  they  are  not  punished  at  all,  much  less  necessarily.  Will 
you  say,  because  they  who  have  committed  such  things  are 
worthy  of  death,  that  therefore  it  is  necessary,  from  an  ab- 
solute necessity,  that  either  they  or  others,  that  is,  that 
either  they  themselves,  who  are  deserving  of  death,  or  some 
one  else,  on  their  account,  though  innocent,  should  be  pu- 
nished ?  Who  can  digest  such  a  consequence  as  this? 
Again,  If  they  are  worthy  of  death,  then  they  shall  die  the 
death  ;  either  then  a  temporal  or  eternal  one  :  beyond  all 
doubt,  he  will  answer,  an  eternal  death.  It  is  necessary, 
therefore,  that  they  should  exist  to  all  eternity,  and  by  an 
absolute  necessity ;  to  the  end,  that  they  may  be  punished 
to  all  eternity.  And  so  then  God  cannot  annihilate  a 
creature.' 

But,  with  this  great  man's  good  leave,  neither  his  mode 
of  disputing,  viz.  by  substituting  a  double  argument  in  the 
place  of  one  solid  and  clear  answer,  is  at  all  satisfactory ; 
nor  are  these  arguments  of  any  service  to  his  cause  ;  the 
first  of  which  is  captious,  and  not  all  solid  ;  the  other  too 
nice  and  curious.  For,  first,  Lubbertus  does  not  contend 
that  God  cannot  pardon  sin  without  a  satisfaction,  because 
simply,  by  some  reason  or  other,  sinners  are  worthy  of  death  : 
but  for  this  reason  only,  because  the  righteous  judgment,  or 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        469 

just  right  of  God  is,  that  they  who  commit  such  things  are 
worthy  of  death  ;  and  that  therefore  it  would  be  unjust  in 
God  not  to  inflict  that  punishment ;  namely,  because,  ac- 
cording to  the  justice  of  God,  which  Twiss  himself  acknow- 
ledges to  be  natural  and  essential  to  him,  they  are  worthy 
of  death  ;  and  therefore  necessarily  to  be  punished.  But 
the  arguments  of  Twiss  do  not  prove  the  contrary;  for  the 
elect  themselves  are  worthy  of  death,  and  therefore  neces- 
sarily to  be  punished ;  not  from  an  absolute  necessity  in 
respect  of  the  mode  of  acting  in  God  the  punisher,  but  in 
respect  of  a  condition  supposed,  and  which  excludes  not  the 
liberty  of  the  agent :  that  is  to  say,  God  may  inflict  the  pu- 
nishment due  to  one  on  another,  after,  in  consequence  of 
his  own  rioht,  and  the  consent  of  that  other,  he  hath  laid 
the  sins  upon  that  other,  on  account  of  which  he  inflicts 
the  punishment ;  he  might  punish  the  elect,  either  in  their 
own  persons  or  in  their  surety  standing  in  their  room  and 
stead  ;  and  when  he  is  punished,  they  also  are  punished  : 
for  in  this  point  of  view  the  federal  head,  and  those  repre- 
sented by  him,  are  not  considered  as  distinct,  but  as  one  : 
for  although  they  are  not  one  in  respect  of  personal  unity, 
they  are  however  one  ;  that  is,  one  body,  in  mystical  union  : 
yea,  one  mystical  Christ  f  viz.  the  surety  is  the  head,  those 
represented  by  him  the  members ;  and  when  the  head  is 
punished,  the  members  also  are  punished.  Nor  could  even 
he  himself  be  called  a  surety  absolutely  innocent ;  for  al- 
though he  was  properly  and  personally  innocent,  he  was 
imputatively  and  substitutively  guilty.  '  For  God  made  him 
to  be  sin  for  us  :  he  laid  the  sins  of  us  all  upon  him.'*^ 

The  second  argument  which  this  learned  writer  uses  to 
confute  the  conclusion  of  Lubbertus,  is  of  no  greater  weight : 
we  are  not  in  the  councils  of  God,  so  that  we  can  precisely 
pronounce,  with  regard  to  his  judgments  and  his  ways  :  that 
God  is  able  absolutely  to  reduce  to  nothing  any  creature 
that  he  hath  created  out  of  nothing;,  no  one  can  doubt ;  but 
it  being  supposed,  that  that  creature  is  guilty  of  sin,  and 
that  that  sin,  according  to  the  right  and  justice  of  God, 
deserves   eternal  death,  we  with  confidence  maintain,  that 

«  See  1  Cor.  xii.  12.  &c.  '  For  as  (he  body  is  one,  and  hath  many  members,  and 
all  the  members  of  that  one  body  beiiijj  many,  are  one  bodj' ;  so  also  is  Christ, '&c. 
<*  2  Cor.  V.  'il.  Isa.  liii.  6. 


470        A    DISSERTATIOTsT    OJf    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

God,  who  cannot  deny  himself,  cannot  reduce  it  to  nothing  : 
neither  is  there  any  thing  absurd  that  can  be  inferred  from 
this. 

To  the  second  proof  brought  from  the  word  of  God, 
declaring  himself  by  that  name  of  his, '  who  will  by  no  means 
clear  the  guilty,'*  he  answers,  '  It  is  true  that  God  will  by 
no  means  clear  the  guilty ;  yet  it  is  evident  that  not  a  few 
are  cleared  by  God  :  the  guilty,  then,  whom  he  doth  not 
clear,  must  be  those  who  have  neither  repented  nor  believed 
in  Christ.  Hence  it  follows,  that  every  one  hath  either  been 
punished,  or  will  be  punished,  either  in  himself  or  in  Christ; 
which  we  do  not  at  all  deny  :  but  it  doth  not  at  all  follow 
hence,  that  God  doth  this  from  a  necessity  of  nature,  for 
it  is  possible  that  it  may  proceed  from  the  free  will  of  God  ; 
neither  doth  it  belong  to  him  to  exercise  his  mercy  and 
bounty  from  a  necessity  of  nature,  but  of  his  free  will.' 

But  1.  It  is  of  no  service  to  his  cause,  to  urge,  that 
God  does  not  punish  some  guilty  sinners  in  their  own  per- 
sons, but  clears  them,  when  this  learned  man  grants,  yea, 
contends  that  they  have  all  been  punished  in  Christ  their 
head;  by  whom  justice  w^as  fully  satisfied.  2.  It  hath 
been  several  times  shewn  before  how  God,  from  a  necessity 
of  nature  punishes  sin,  and  yet  with  a  concomitant  liberty 
of  will ;  and  the  difference  between  justice  and  mercy,  in 
respect  of  their  exercise  and  egress  towards  their  proper 
objects,  hath  been  shewn  :  so  that  we  do  not  think  it  pro- 
per to  insist  farther  on  these  at  present.  These  consider- 
ations then  being  set  aside,  it  is  evident  that  this  learned 
man  has  not  attended  to  the  force  of  the  argument :  for  that 
conclusion  does  not  arise  from  the  passage,  that  in  respect 
of  the  event  God  clears  none  unpunished  either  in  themselves 
or  in  their  surety  ;  an  assertion  which  nobody  but  a  Soci- 
nian  speaks  against;  but  rather  this,  that  as  punitory  justice 
is  a  natural  attribute  of  God,  a  very  considerable  portion  of 
his  essential  glory,  yea,  a  well-known  name  of  God,  *he  can 
by  no  means  clear  the  guilty,'  unless  he  were  to  deny  him- 
self, and  deliver  up  his  glory  to  another,  than  which  nothing 
is  farther  from  God,  But  those,  for  whom  the  divine  justice 
hath  been  satisfied  by  Christ,  ought  not,  in  respect  of  the 
demand  of  that  justice,  to  be  called  guilty  ;  for  their  obli- 

«  See  Exod.  xxxiv.  6,  7, 


A    DISSERTATION     ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.       471 

gation  to  punishment,  viz.  the  guilt  of  sin,  is  taken  away  ; 
so  that  it  is  just  with  God  to  deliver  them  from  the  wrath  to 
come,  although  it  be  free  to  him  at  what  time  he  may  will, 
that  that  deliverance,  in  respect  of  them,  should  take  place, 
and  be  manifested  to  their  consciences,  that  so  '  being  jus- 
tified by  faith,  they  may  have  peace  with  God.' 

To  these  verses,  cited  by  Lubbertus  from  the  fifth  Psalm,^ 
verses  4th,  5th,  and  6th,  he  thus  replies  :  *  The  prophet  is 
testifying,'  says  he,  '  that  God  hates  all  who  work  iniquity ; 
however,  it  is  sufficiently  evident,  that  God  does  not  punish 
all  who  work  iniquity  ;  for  he  does  not  punish  the  elect :  I 
acknowledge,  that  God  will  in  his  own  time  destroy  all  the 
wicked  out  of  Christ ;  but  of  his  free  will,  and  from  no  con- 
sideration of  necessity,  as  he  is  an  agent,  entirely  free.' 

I  am  not  altogether  satisfied  with  this  assertion,  '  that 
God  doth  not  punish  all  who  work  iniquity';'  neither  does 
the  instance  of  the  elect  confirm  it :  for  even  the  learned 
gentleman  does  not  deny  that  all  their  sins  have  been  pu- 
nished in  Christ.  We  maintain  alone,  that  God  cannot  but 
punish  every  sin,  because  he  is  just:  but  whether  he  chose 
to  do  this  in  their  own  persons,  or  in  their  surety,  rests  en- 
tirely with  himself:  therefore,  it  doth  not  derogate  from  his 
justice,  that  he  transferred  the  sins  of  some  upon  Christ,  and 
punished  them  in  him  ;  but  they  themselves,  though  per- 
sonally guilty,  before  Christ  took  their  guilt  upon  himself, 
are  not  however  punished,  nor  can  be  accounted  guilty,  in 
respect  of  the  judgment  of  God,  their  sins  not  being  im- 
puted to  them ;  or  they  ought  to  be  said  to  have  been  pu- 
nished in  Christ  their  head,  with  whom  they  are  now  closely 
united.  In  the  second  place  we  have  shewn  before,  and  the 
learned  gentleman  acknowledges  it,  that  a  free  act  of  the 
will  may  be  consistent  with  some  regard  to  necessity. 

Allow  me,  then,  from  these  three  passages  of  Scripture, 
cited  by  Lubbertus,  to  collect  one  argument  only;  which, 
if  I  mistake  not,  no  one  of  the  various  arguments  of  our  very 
learned  antagonist,  nor  even  all  of  them,  will  be  able  to  over- 
throw. It  is  to  this  purpose  :  If  that  just  right  or  righteous 
judgment  of  God  be  essential,  viz.  that  which  is  made  ma- 

^  The  words  are,  'For  thou  art  not  a  God  that  hath  pleasure  in  wickedness  : 
neither  shall  any  evil  dwell  with  thee.  The  foolish  shall  not  stand  in  thy  sight; 
thou  hatest  all  workers  of  iniquity.  Thou  shalt  destroy  them  that  speak  leasing  ; 
the  Lord  will  abhor  the  bloody  and  deceitful  man.' 


472        A    DISSERTATION    OX    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

nifest  and  known  to  all  by  nature  :s  if  his  avenging  justice 
be  such,  that  he  will  by  no  means  clear  the  guilty  :^  If,  as 
he  hates  sin,  so  he  will  destroy  all  the  workers  of 'iniquity; 
then  it  is  natural  to  God  to  punish  sin,  and  he  cannot  let  it 
pass  unpunished  ;  for  he  can  do  nothing  contrary  to  his  na- 
tural attributes,  exercised  about  their  proper  objects  :  but 
the  former  part  of  the  argument  is  true,*"  so  also  must  the 
latter. 

But  Lubbertus  likewise  reasons  by  an  argument  taken 
from  the  common  definition  of  justice  ;  to  which  Twiss  also 
refers  :  'Vindicatory  justice,'  says  he,  *  is  the  eternal  will  of 
God,  to  give  to  every  one  his  own  ;  therefore  it  belongs  truly 
or  naturally  to  God.'  Twiss  cites  these  words  from  Lub- 
bertus ;  for  his  writings  against  Vossius  I  have  not  by  me 
at  present.  Now  although  this  justly  celebrated  man  some- 
times agrees  to  this  conclusion,  yet  as  he  twitches  the  ar- 
gument various  ways,  we  shall,  as  briefly  as  possible,  bring 
it  in  regular  order  to  a  point.  '  First  of  all,'  says  he,  '  allow 
metoput  you  in  mind,  that  that  definition  of  justice  holds  good 
only  with  regard  to  justice  in  general;  but  not  w^ith  regard 
to  vindicatory  justice  in  particular;  for  the  whole  of  justice 
is  employed  in  giving  to  every  one  his  own.'  I  have  said 
before,  that  that  definition  of  the  civilians  was  not  quite 
agreeable  to  me  ;  nor  in  every  respect  satisfactory  :  but  the 
objection  ofTwiss's  is  of  no  weight;  for  vindicatory  justice 
is  not  distinguished  from  universal  justice,  or  justice  gene- 
rally so  called,  as  to  its  habit ;  but  only  in  respect  of  its 
egress  to  its  proper  object :  and  therefore,  nothing  ought  to 
be  included  in  the  definition,  which  is  not  found  also  in  the 
thing  itself.  Although,  then,  the  learned  opponent  throws 
obstacles  in  the  way,  he  cannot  deny  that  vindicatory  justice 
is,  '  a  will  to  give  to  every  one  his  own,  or  what  is  due  to  him.' 

•But  let  Lubbertus  bethink  himself,' says  Twiss, '  whether 
the  divine  bounty  is  not  likewise  the  eternal  will  of  the 
Deity  to  give  to  some,  beyond  what  is  their  own  ?  Would  it 
not  then  justly  follow  that  it  is  necessary,  and  even  from  ab- 
solute necessity,  that  he  should  exercise  his  bounty  towards 
some  V 

But  neither  is  this  comparison,  between  things  dissi- 

s  See  Rom.  i.  32.  ''  See  Exod.  xxxiv.  4.  •  Psal.  v.  i — 6. 

''  Being  founded  on  the  words  of  Scripture. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        473 

milar  of  the  smallest  advantage  to  our  adversary's  cause ; 
for,  1.  The  objects  themselves,  about  which  these  attri- 
butes are  employed,  are  very  different :  for  vi^ho  does  not 
see  that  there  cannot  be  any  comparison  formed  between  the 
giving  to  every  one  according  to  his  right,  and  giving  to 
some  beyond  their  right.  That,  to  give  to  any  one  beyond 
his  right,  is  a  most  free  act  of  the  will,  the  thing  itself  de- 
clares :  but  to  give  to  every  one  his  own,  or  what  is  due  to 
him,  the  very  thing  itself  requires.  All  acknowledge  that 
it  depends  on  the  mere  good  pleasure  of  the  Deity,  whether 
he  may  will  to  be  bounteous  towards  any  :  but  who,  but  an 
impious  wretch,  would  be  bold  enough  to  dispute  whether 
he  may  will  to  be  just  towards  n.ny  ?  But  besides,  supposing 
a  constant  will  in  the  Deity,  of  giving  to  some  beyond  their 
right,  or  of  bestowing  on  them  more  than  they  deserve,  in 
what  respect  it  would  not  be  necessary  (the  question  does 
not  respect  absolute  necessity)  to  him  to  exercise  that 
bounty  towards  these  some,  I  absolutely  do  not  comprehend. 
But,  with  regard  to  the  divine  bounty,  and  in  what  sense 
that  is  ascribed  to  God,  and  what  kind  of  habitude  of  the 
divine  will  it  denotes,  this  is  not  the  place  to  inquire. 

He  again  says,  '  If  hence  it  follow,  that  it  is  necessary 
that  God  should  give  to  each  his  due,  it  will  certainly  be 
necessary  that  he  should  give  to  each  of  us  eternal  dam- 
nation.' 

Thus,  that  punishment  belongs  not  to  us,  but  to  God 
himself,  the  learned  gentleman  will  afterward  acknow- 
ledge :  but  God  may  give  to  every  one  his  own,  or  what  is 
due  to  every  one,  in  the  infliction  of  punishment,  although 
he  do  not  inflict  it  on  the  sinners  themselves,  but  on  their 
surety,  substituted  in  their  room  and  stead.  Thus  he  gives 
glory  to  his  justice,  and  does  no  injury  to  us;  for  no  one 
can  demand  it  as  his  right  to  be  punished  ;  for  no  one  hath 
a  right  to  require  punishment,  which  is  an  involuntary  evil ; 
but  rather  becomes  subject  to  the  right  of  another. 

To  these  he  replies,  '  If  justice  be  only  the  will  of  giving 
to  every  one  his  own,  it  is  not  the  necessity  of  giving  it.' 

But  here  the  learned  gentleman  trifles  ;  for  will  and  ne- 
cessity are  not  opposed,  as  a  thing  itself  may  be  prior,  and 
the  mode  or  affection  of  it  posterior  to  some  other  things, 

VOL.    IX.  2  I 


474        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

either  in  the  first  or  second  act.'  Neither  hath  any  one  de- 
fined the  justice  of  God  by  necessity,  although  from  his 
justice  it  is  necessary  that  he  should  act  justly:  though  it 
be  the  will  of  God,  viz. '  to  give  every  one  what  is  his  due,' 
yet  it  is  a  constant  and  immutable  will ;  which,  as  it  differs 
not  in  any  respect  from  the  divine  essence  itself,  must  exist 
necessarily;  and  a  proper  object  for  its  exercise  being  sup- 
posed, it  must  necessarily  operate,  though  it  act  freely. 

In  the  last  place,  then,  this  celebrated  writer  denies,  'That 
punishment  can  properly  be  called  ours,  in  such  a  sense, 
that  from  his  will  of  giving  to  every  one  his  own,  it  should 
be  necessary  that  God  should  inflict  it  upon  us  sinners  ;  but 
he  asserts,  that  it  belongs  to  God,  as  having  the  full  power 
either  of  inflicting  or  relaxing  it.'  That  punishment  is  ours, 
or  belongs  to  us,  cannot  be  said  with  propriety ;  it  must  be 
traced  to  the  source  whence  it  hath  its  rise  ;  that  is,  whence 
it  is  just  that  it  should  be  inflicted  upon  sinners;  but  this 
is  the  just  right  or  righteous  judgment  of  God  ;  Rom.  i.  32. 
Thus  far,  then,  it  may  be  reckoned  among  the  things  that 
belong  to  God,  as  it  is  his  justice  that  requires  it  should  be  in- 
flicted :  but  it  does  not  follow,  that  God  has  a  full  power  of 
inflicting  it,  or  relaxing  it,  because  in  this  sense  it  may  be 
accounted  among  the  things  which  belong  to  him  :  God 
owes  it  to  himself  to  have  a  proper  regard  to  the  honour  of 
all  his  own  perfections. 

We  choose  not  to  enter  any  farther  on  the  arguments 
which  this  learned  writer  advances  either  in  his  disputations 
against  Lubbertus,  or  in  his  answers  to  his  arguments; 
partly,  as  they  coincide  with  those  mentioned  before,  and 
have  been  considered  in  the  vindication  of  the  argument 
taken  from  the  consideration  of  God's  hatred  against  sin  ; 
and  partly  as  they  militate  only  against  a  natural  and  abso- 
lute necessity;  which,  in  the  present  case, we  do  not  assert. 

•  God's  will  of  giving  to  every  man  his  own,  was  from  everlasting,  justice  being 
an  essential  attribute  of  liis  unchangeable  nature  ;  but  it  is  only  after  the  supposition 
of  a  rational  being  that  had  sinned,  that  he  must  necessarily,  i.  e.  from  the  very  prin- 
ciples of  Ills  nature,  exercise  that  will  towards  sinners,  and  give  them  the  wages  of 
sin,  viz.  death. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        471 


CHAP.  XVI. 

Piscator's  opinion  of  this  controversy.  How  far  we  assent  to  it.  Twiss's 
arguments  militate  against  it.  How  G  od  punishes  from  a  vatin-al  neces- 
sity. How  God  is  a  consuming  fire.  God's  right,  of  what  kind.  Its 
exercise  necessary,  from  some  thiny  supposed.  Whence  the  obliyation  of 
God  to  exercise  it  arises.     Other  objections  of  Ttviss  discussed. 

The  consideration  of  what  our  justly  celebrated  antagonist 
hath  advanced  against  Piscator,  whom  he  declares  to  hold 
the  first  place  among  the  theologians  of  the  present  day ; 
and  to  shine  as  far  superior  to  the  rest,  as  the  moon  doth  to 
the  lesser  stars,  shall  put  an  end  to  this  dispute.  lie  has 
chosen  Piscator's  notes  upon  his  collation  of  Vorstius,  as 
the  subject  of  his  consideration  and  discussion.  In  general 
we  are  inclined  to  give  our  voice  in  favour  of  the  sentiments 
of  Piscator;  but  as  the  disciples  of  Christ  ought  to  call  none 
on  earth  master,  in  matters  of  religion,  we  by  no  means  hold 
ourselves  bound  to  support  all  the  phrases,  arguments,  or 
reasons,  that  he  may  have  used  in  defence  of  his  opinion. 
Setting  aside,  then,  all  anxious  search  after  words,  expres- 
sions, &c.  the  minutiae  of  similies,  which  I  could  wish  this 
distinguished  writer  had  paid  less  attention  to ;  we  will  en- 
deavour to  repel  every  charge  brought  against  our  common 
and  principal  cause  ;  and  to  place  this  truth,  which  we  have 
thus  far  defended,  as  we  are  now  speedily  hastening  to  a 
conclusion,  beyond  the  reach  of  attacks,  and  trouble  from 
its  adversaries. 

The  first  argument  then  of  Piscator,  to  which  he  replies, 
is  taken  from  that  comparison  made  in  Heb.  xii.  2.  between 
God,  in  respect  of  his  vindicatory  justice,  and  a  consuming 
fire.  From  this  passage  Piscator  concludes,  '  That  as  fire, 
from  the  property  of  its  nature,  cannot  but  burn  combusti- 
ble matter  when  applied  to  it,  and  that  by  a  natural  neces- 
sity ;  so  God,  from  the  perfection  of  his  justice,  cannot  but 
punish  sin  when  committed;  that  is,  when  presented  before 
that  justice.'  What  he  asserts,  with  regard  to  a  natural  and 
absolute  necessity,  we  do  not  admit ;  for  God  neither  ex- 
erciseth,  nor  can  exercise  any  act  towards  objects  without 
himself  in  a  natural  manner,  or  as  an  agent  merely  natural. 
He  indeed,  is  a  fire,  but  rational  and  intelligent  fire;  although, 

2  I  2 


476        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

then,  it  be  no  less  necessary  to  him  to  punish  sins,  than  it  is 
to  fire  to  burn  the  combustible  matter  applied  to  it:  the  same 
manner  of  operation,  however,  accords  not  to  him  as  to  fire, 
for  he  worketh  as  an  intelligent  agent ;  that  is,  with  a  con- 
comitant liberty  in  the  acts  of  his  will,  and  a  consistent 
liberty  in  the  acts  of  his  understanding.  We  agree,  then, 
with  Piscator  in  his  conclusion,  though  not  in  his  manner 
of  leading  his  proof:  the  objections  made  to  it  by  the  learned 
Twiss,  we  shall  try  by  the  standard  of  truth. 

First,  then,  he  maintains,  and  with  many  laboured  argu- 
ments, that  God  doth  not  punish  sin  from  a  necessity  of  na- 
ture, which  excludes  every  kind  of  liberty.  But  whom  do 
these  kind  of  arguments  affect?  they  apply  not  at  all  to  us: 
for  Piscator  himself  seems  to  have  understood  nothing  else 
by  a  natural  necessity,  than  that  necessity  which  we  have  so 
often  discussed,  particularly  modified.  For  he  says,  '  That 
God  doth  some  things  by  a  natural  necessity,  because  by 
nature  he  cannot  do  otherwise.'  That  is,  sin  being  supposed 
to  exist,  from  the  strict  demands  of  that  justice,  which  is 
natural  to  him,  he  cannot  but  punish  it,  or  act  otherwise 
than  punish  it;  although  he  may  do  this,  without  any  en- 
croachment on  his  liberty,  as  his  intellectual  will  is  in- 
clined to  happiness,  by  a  natural  inclination,  yet  wills  hap- 
piness with  a  concomitant  liberty  ;  for  it  would  not  be  a  will, 
should  it  act  otherwise,  as  freedom  of  action  is  the  very  es- 
sence of  the  will.  But  the  arguments  of  Twiss  do  not  op- 
pose this  kind  of  necessity,  but  that  only  which  belongs  to 
animate,  merely  natural  agents ;  which  entirely  excludes  all 
sorts  of  liberty,  properly  so  called. 

Let  us  particularly  examine  some  of  this  learned  gentle- 
man's arguments.  '  If,'  says  he,  '  God  must  punish  sin  from 
a  necessity  of  nature,  he  must  punish  it  as  soon  as  commit- 
ted.' Granted;  were  he  to  act  by  such  a  necessity  of  nature, 
as  denotes  a  necessary  principle  and  mode  of  acting ;  but 
not  if  by  a  necessity  that  is  improperly  so  called,  because 
it  is  supposed  that  his  nature  necessarily  requires  that  he 
should  so  act :  as  for  instance,  suppose  that  he  wills  to 
speak,  he  must  by  necessity  of  his  nature  speak  truly,  for 
God  cannot  lie  ;  yet  he  speaks  freely,  when  he  speaks  truly. 

Again,  '  If,'  says  he,  '  God  punished  from  a  necessity  of 
nature,  then,  as  often  as  he  inflicted  punishment,  he  would 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  477 

inflict  it  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  as  fire  burns  with  all  its 
force  :  but  this  cannot  be  said  without  blasphemy.' 

Here  again,  this  learned  man  draws  absurd  conclusions 
from  a  false  supposition.  The  nature  of  God  requires  that 
he  should  punish  as  far  as  is  just,  not  as  far  as  he  is  able.  It 
is  necessary,  sin  being  supposed  to  exist,  that  he  should  in- 
flict punishment;  not  the  greatest  that  he  is  able  to  inflict, 
but  as  great  as  his  right  and  justice  require  :  for  in  ordain- 
ing punishment,  he  proceeds  freely  according  to  the  rule  of 
these.  It  is  necessary  that  the  glory  of  the  divine  holiness, 
purity,  and  dominion,  should  be  vindicated  ;  but  in  what 
manner,  at  what  time,  in  what  degree,  or  by  what  kind  of 
punishment,  belongs  entirely  to  God ;  and  we  are  not  of  his 
counsels  :  but  I  am  fully  confident,  that  the  arguments  last 
urged  by  this  learned  gentleman,  may  be  answered  in  one 
word.  I  say,  then,  God  punishes  according  to  what  is  due 
to  sin  by  the  rule  of  his  right,  not  to  what  extent  he  is  able. 
As  for  instance,  God  does  not  use  his  omnipotence  from  an 
absolute  necessity  of  nature  ;  but  supposing  that  he  wills  to 
do  any  work  without  himself,  he  cannot  act  but  omnipo- 
tently. Neither,  however,  doth  it  hence  follow,  that  God 
acts  to  the  utmost  extent  of  his  power;  for  he  might  have 
created  more  worlds.  We  do  not  then  affirm,  that  God  is 
so  bound  by  the  laws  of  an  absolute  necessity,  that  like  an 
insensible  and  merely  natural  agent,  it  would  be  impossible 
for  him,  by  his  infinite  wisdom,  to  assign,  according  to  the 
rule  and  demand  of  his  justice,  degrees,  modes,  duration,  and 
extension  of  punishment ;  according  to  the  degrees  of  the 
demerit,  or  circumstances  of  the  sin ;  or  even  to  transfer  it 
upon  the  surety,  who  has  voluntarily,  and  with  his  own  ap- 
probation, submitted  himself  in  the  room  of  sinners  ;  but  we 
only  affirm,  that  his  natural  and  essential  justice  indispensa- 
bly requires  that  every  sin  should  have  its  just  recompense 
of  reward  :  and  were  not  this  the  case,  a  sinful  creature 
might  emancipate  itself  from  the  power  of  its  Creator  and 
Lord.  This  very  learned  man  having,  according  to  his  usual 
custom,  introduced  these  preliminary  observations,  at  length 
advaiices  his  answers  to  Piscator's  argument;  the  nature 
and  quality  of  which  we  shall  particularly  consider.  That 
which  he  chiefly  depends  upon,  which  he  forges  from  the 
Scripture,  that  asserts  God,  in  respect  of  sin,  to  be  'a  con- 


478         A    IJISSEKTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE- 

Sliming  fire,'  we  have  examined  in  the  proof  of  our  second 
argument,  and  have  shewn  of  how  little  weight  it  is  to  in- 
validate the  force  of  our  argument. 

To  that  asseveration  of  Abraham,  '  Shall  not  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth  do  right  V  he  thus  answers;  '  He  will  do  right 
certainly;  but  his  own  right,  and  will  exercise  it  according 
to  his  own  free  appointment;  but  without  the  divine  ap- 
pointment, I  acknowledge  no  right,  to  the  exercise  of  which 
God  can  be  influenced  by  any  kind  of  necessity.' 

Arts.  That  God  exerciseth  his  right,  or  doeth  right,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  free  appointment,  may  be  admitted  in  a 
sound  sense;  for  in  that  exercise  of  his  right  he  uses  volition 
and  understanding;  or  more  properly,  he  hath  not  appointed 
or  determined  so  to  act ;  for  so  to  act  is  natural  and  essen- 
tial to  him  concerning  the  things  about  which  there  is  no 
free  determination.  It  is  indeed  of  the  free  determination  of 
God,  that  any  right  can  be  exercised,  or  any  attribute  ma- 
nifested ;  for  he  freely  decreed  to  create  creatures,  over 
which  he  hath  a  right ;  but  he  might  not  have  decreed  it  so; 
and  in  every  exercise  of  his  right,  there  are  certain  things 
which  we  have  mentioned  before,  which  are  not  the  objects 
of  free  determination ;  but  that  no  right  belongs  to  God, 
without  his  divine  appointment,  to  the  exercise  of  which  he 
is  bound,  is  asserted  without  probability,  and  appears  evi- 
dently false  ;  for  supposing  that  God  willed  to  create  ra- 
tional creatures,  does  it  depend  upon  his  free  determination, 
that  the  right  of  dominion,  and  the  exercise  of  it  should  be- 
long to  liim  ?  If  so,  God  might  be  neither  the  Lord  nor  God 
of  his  creatures ;  and  a  rational  creature  may  be  neither 
creature  nor  rational ;  for  both  its  creation  and  reason  sup- 
pose a  dependance  on,  and  subjection  to,  some  Lord  and 
Creator.  If  the  right  then  of  dominion  depended  on  the 
free  determination  of  God,  then  God  might  freely  and  justly 
determine  that  he  would  neither  have  nor  exercise  such 
right ;  for  he  might  determine  the  contrary  of  that  which  he 
hath  freely  determined,  without  any  injustice  or  any  incon- 
gruity. From  himself,  then,  and  not  from  any  one  without 
himself,  that  is,  from  his  own  nature,  he  receives  the  obli- 
gation to  exercise  his  right,  both  of  dominion  and  of  jus- 
tice ;  thus,  by  nature  he  must  speak  truly,  if  he  wills  to 
speak. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         479 

*  But  I  cannot,'  says  this  renowned  man,  *  sufficiently  ex- 
press my  astonishment  at  this  very  grave  divine's  assertion,* 
viz.  That  God  without  injury  to  his  justice,  may  will  evil  an- 
tecedently to  whomsoever  he  pleases  (for  which  I  do  not 
find  fault  with  him),  but  that  he  does  not  assert  that  God,  for 
the  same,  or  a  better  reason,  might  do  good  to  a  creature, 
notwithstanding  its  demerit,  by  pardoning  its  sin.' 

If  by  *  willing  evil  antecedently'  be  understood  his  willing 
to  inflict  evil  without  regard  to  the  demerit  of  sin,  it  is  a 
point  too  intricate  for  me  to  determine ;  if  the  evil  refer  to 
the  infliction  of  it,  I  must  differ  from  this  learned  doctor. 
If  it  refer  to  the  willing,  the  assertion  avails  not  his  cause  ; 
for,  if  we  suppose  that  God,  without  doing  injury  to  any 
one,  without  dishonouring  any  of  his  own  attributes,  with- 
out regard  to  sin,  hath  decreed  to  punish  a  creature  for  the 
sin  that  it  was  to  commit ;  would  it  not  thence  follow,  that 
God  might  let  sin  pass  unpunished,  in  despite  both  of  his 
own  glory,  and  to  the  entire  destruction  of  the  dependance 
of  rational''  creatures;  nor  is  the  following  comment  of  our 
celebrated  opponent  of  any  greater  weight,  viz.  'That  God 
would  not  be  omnipotent,  if  he  necessarily  punishes  sin  ; 
for  thence  it  would  follow,  that  God  cannot  annihilate  a  sin- 
ful creature  which  he  created  out  of  nothing ;  which,'  says 
he,  '  is  evidently  contrary  to  omnipotence.' 

But  how  many  things  are  there  which  this  learned  gen- 
tleman himself  acknowledges,  that  God,  with  respect  to  his 
decree,  cannot  do  without  any  disparagement  to  his  omni- 
potence ?  He  could  not  break  the  bones  of  Christ ;  but  the 
person  must  be  deprived  of  reason  who  would  assert,  that 
this  is  any  diminution  of  the  divine  omnipotence.  If,  then, 
there  be  many  things  which  God  cannot  do  without  any  the 
smallest  detraction  from  his  omnipotence,  because  by  a  free 
determination  he  hath  decreed  not  to  do  them,  is  he  to  be 
thought  less  omnipotent,  so  to  speak,  because  he  cannot,  on 
account  of  his  justice,  let  sins  committed  pass  unpunished? 
Is  God  not  omnipotent,  because  on  account  of  his  nature  he 
cannot  lie  ?  Yea,  he  would   not  be  omnipotent  if  he  could 

*  Viz.  Piscator's. 
^  Because  if  he  punished  a  creature  for  sin  merely,  because  he  willed  or  deter- 
mined so  to  do  ;  and  not  because   the  nature  of  sin  necessarily  so  required  ;  he 
might  as  easily  will  the  contrary,  and  Consequently  the  subordination  of  the  crea- 
ture would  be  entirely  subverted. 


480  A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE, 

renounce  his  right  and  justice  ;  for  to  permit  a  sinful  crea- 
ture to  shake  off  his  natural  dominion,  is  not  a  mark  of  om- 
nipotence but  of  impotence ;  than  which  nothing  is  more 
remote  from  God. 

After  having  brought  the  dispute  thus  far,  and  accurately 
weighed  what  remains  of  Dr.  Twiss's  answer  to  Piscator, 
there  seemed  to  me  nothing  that  could  occur  to  give  any 
trouble  to  an  intelligent  reader  ;  as  there  is  no  reason,  then, 
either  to  give  farther  trouble  to  the  reader  or  myself  on  this 
point,  we  here  conclude  the  controversy  :  and  this  I  do  with 
entertaining  the  strongest  hopes  that  no  person  of  discre- 
tion, or  who  is  unacquainted  with  the  pernicious  devices 
which  almost  every  where  abound,  will  impute  it  to  me  as  a 
matter  of  blame,  that  I,  a  person  of  no  consideration,  and 
so  very  full  too  of  employment,  that  I  could  devote  only  a 
few  leisure  hours  to  this  disputation,  should  have  attacked 
the  theological  digression  of  a  man  so  very  illustrious  and 
renowned ;  not  only  among  our  own  countrymen,  but  even 
in  foreign  nations  ;  as  the  attack  has  been  made  in  the  cause 
of  truth. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.  481 


CHAP.  XVII. 

Rutherford  reviewed.  An  oversight  of  that  learned  man.  His  opinion  of 
punitory  justice.  He  contends  that  divine  justice  exists  in  God  freely. 
The  consideration  of  that  assertion.  This  learned  writer  and  Ttviss  dis- 
agree. His  first  argument.  Its  answer.  The  appointment  of  Christ 
to  death,  twofold.  The  appointment  of  Christ  to  the  mediatorial  office, 
an  act  of  supreme  dominion.  The  punishment  of  Christ  an  act  of  puni- 
tory justice.  An  argument  of  thai  learned  man,  easy  to  ansiver.  The 
examination  of  the  same.  The  learned  xvriter  proves  things  not  denied  ; 
passes  over  things  to  he  denied.  What  kind  of  necessity  we  ascribe  to 
God  in  punishing  sins.  A  necessity  upon  a  condition  supposed.  What 
the  suppositions  are  upon  which  that  necessity  is  founded.  A  difference 
between  those  things  which  are  necessary  by  a  decree,  and  those  which  are 
so  from  the  divine  nature.  The  second  argument  of  that  learned  man. 
His  obscure  manner  of  writing  pointed  out.  Justice  and  mercy  different 
in  respect  of  their  exercise.  What  it  is  to  owe  the  good  of  punitory  jus-' 
tice  to  the  universe.  This  learned  mail's  third  argument.  The  answer. 
Whether  God  could foi-lid  sin,  and  not  under  the  penalty  of  eternal  death. 
Concerning  the  management  of  punishment  in  human  courts  from  the 
divine  appointment.  The  manner  of  it.  What  this  learned  author  un- 
derstands by  the  internal  court  of  God.  This  learned  author's  fourth 
argument.  All  acts  of  grace  have  a  respect  to  Christ.  His  fifth  argu- 
ment. The  answer.  A  dissertation  on  the  various  degrees  of  punish-' 
ment.  For  what  reason  God  may  act  imequally  with  equals.  Concern- 
ing the  delay  of  punishment,  and  its  various  dispensations. 

The  consideration  of  the  arguments  advanced  by  Mr.  Samuel 
Rutherford"  against  this  truth  which  we  are  now  maintaining, 
shall  conclude  this  dissertation.  He  maintains,  as  I  have 
observed  before,  '  That  punitory  justice  exists  not  in  God 
by  necessity  of  nature,  but  freely.'  And  he  has  said,  that 
Tvviss  hath  proved  this,  by  a  variety  of  arguments ;  one  of 
which,  in  preference  to  the  others,  he  builds  on,  as  unan- 
swerable. 

But,  with  this  great  man's  leave,  I  must  tell  him,  that 
Twiss  hath  never  even  said,  much  less  proved,  *  That  puni- 
tory justice  exists  freely  in  God,  and  not  from  a  necessity 
of  nature ;'  nor,  indeed,  can  it  be  said  by  any  one,  with 
any  shew  of  reason  :  for  punitory  justice  denotes  the 
habit  of  justice;  nor  is  it  less  justice  because  it  is  puni- 
tory.    But  be  assured  the  accurate  Twiss  hath  never  main- 

<*  In  his  book  on  Providence,  chap,  22.  page  345. 


482        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

tained  that  any  habit  exists  in  God  freely,  and  not  from  a 
necessity  of  nature.  We  have  before  accounted  in  what 
sense  habits  are  ascribed  to  God  :  even  the  more  sagacious 
Socinians  do  not  fall  into  such  a  blunder ;  but  they  deny 
such  a  habit  to  exist  in  God  at  all,  and  entirely  divest  him 
of  this  justice.  Twiss,  indeed,  maintains,  that  the  exercise 
of  that  justice  is  free  to  God,  but  grants  that  justice  itself 
is  a  natural  attribute  of  God  ;  the  Socinians,  that  it  is  only 
a  free  act  of  the  divine  will :  which  party  this  learned  author 
favours,  appears  not  from  his  words.  If  by  justice  he  means 
the  habit,  he  sides  with  the  Socinians  ;  if  the  act  and  ex- 
ercise, he  is  of  the  same  opinion  with  Twiss,  although  he 
expresses  his  sentiments  rather  unhappily.  But  let  us  con- 
sider this  learned  writer's  arguments. 

The  first,  which  he  acknowledges  to  be  taken  from 
Twiss  (the  same  thing  may  be  said  of  most  of  his  others) 
and  which  he  pronounces  unanswerable,  is  this  :  *  God  gave 
up  his  most  innocent  Son,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  death, 
in  consequence  of  his  punitory  justice,  and  it  was  certainly 
in  his  power  not  to  have  devoted  him  to  death  ;  for  from  no 
necessity  of  nature  did  God  devote  his  Son  to  death  ;  for  if 
so,  then  God  would  not  have  been  God,  which  is  absurd ; 
for  of  his  free  love  he  gave  him  up  to  death;'  John  iii.  6. 
Rom.  viii.  32. 

As  there  is  no  need  of  a  sword  to  cut  this  indissoluble 
knot,  as  he  calls  it,  let  us  try  by  words  what  we  can  do  to 
untie  it.  I  answer  then,  '  The  devoting  of  Christ  to  death 
is  taken  in  a  twofold  sense:  1.  For  the  appointment  of 
Christ  to  the  office  of  surety,  and  to  suffer  the  punishment 
of  our  sins  in  our  room  and  stead.  2.  For  the  infliction 
of  punishment  upon  Christ,  now  appointed  our  surety ;  and 
our  delivery  through  his  death  being  now  supposed,' 

The  devoting  of  Christ  to  death,  considered  in  the  first 
sense,  we  deny  to  be  an  act  of  punitory  justice,  or  to  have 
arisen  from  that  justice.  For  that  act  by  which  God  des- 
tined his  Son  to  the  work  of  mediation,  by  which,  in  respect 
of  their  guilt,  he  transferred  from  us  all  our  sins,  and  laid 
them  upon  Christ,  are  acts  of  supreme  dominion,  and  breathe 
love  and  grace  rather  than  avenging  justice.  But  the  pu- 
nishment of  Christ,  made,  sin  for  us,  is  an  act  of  punitory 
justice.     Nor  upon  the  suppositioii  that  he  was  received  in 


A    UlSSEUTATIOX    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       483 

our  room  as  our  surety,  could  it  be  otherwise;  and  although 
in  drawing  such  consequences,  I  think  we  ought  to  refrain 
as  to  what  might  be  possible,  I  am  not,  however,  afraid  to 
affirm,  that  God  could  not  have  been  God,  that  is,  just  and 
true,  if  he  had  not  devoted  to  death  his  Son,  when  thus  ap- 
pointed our  Mediator. 

What  shall  we  say,  when  we  consider  that  even  this 
learned  man  was  aware  of  this  twofold  sense  of  the  phrase 
'  the  devoting  of  Christ  to  death,'  he  even  had  thoroughly 
weighed  that  distinction,  or  else  he  is  inconsistent  with,  and 
shamefully  contradicts  himself;  for  in  the  beginning  of  the 
argument  he  asserts,  *  that  the  devoting  of  Christ  to  death 
has  its  rise  from  punitory  justice  :'  but  in  the  end,  he  says, 
it  was  from  'free  love;'  but  certainly  punishing  justice  is 
not  free  love  ;  he  must  then  either  acknowledge  a  twofold 
appointment  of  Christ  to  death,  or  he  cannot  be  consistent 
with  himself.  But  the  passages  of  Scripture  that  he  quotes, 
evidently  mean  the  appointment  of  Christ  to  death,  as  we 
have  explained  it  in  the  first  sense  of  the  phrase. 

What  reason  this  learned  man  had  for  so  much  boasting 
of  this  argument,  as  unanswerable,  let  the  reader  determine: 
to  me  it  appears  not  only  very  easily  answerable,  but  far 
beneath  many  others,  that  one,  disputing  on  such  a  subject, 
must  encounter. 

But  he  introduces  some  as  making  answers  to  his  argu- 
ment, who  affirm  '  that  Christ  was  not  innocent,  but  a  sinner 
by  imputation,  and  made  sin  for  us,  and  that  it  was  neces- 
sary, from  the  essential  justice  of  God,  and  his  authority,  as 
enjoining,  that  he  should  make  atonement  for  sin,  in  himself, 
and  in  his  own  person.' 

I  applaud  the  prudence  of  this  learned  man,  who  from 
no  kind  of  necessity,  but  freely,  frames  answers  to  his  own 
arguments  :  here  he  has  exhibited  such  a  one,  as  nobody 
but  himself  would  have  dreamed  of.  For,  although  what 
your  disputants,  or  this  learned  divine,  fighting  with  himself, 
say  be  true,  he  must  however  be  a  fool,  who  can  believe  that 
it  has  any  relation  to  the  present  subject.  To  those  adver- 
saries who  urge,  '  that  God  freely  punishes  sin  because  he 
punished  his  Son,  who  knew  no  sin,  and  who  contend  that 
God  may  e([uully  not  punisli  the  guilty,  as  punish  the  inno- 
cent,' we  answer,  that  Christ,  though   intrinsically  and  per- 


484        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

sonally  innocent,  yet,  as  he  was  by  substitution,  and  conse- 
quently legally  guilty,  is  no  instance  of  the  punishment  of 
an  innocent  person ;  for  he  was  not  punished  as  the  most 
innocent  Son  of  God.  Passing  over  these  things,  then,  and 
indeed  they  are  of  no  import  to  the  present  subject,  he  en- 
deavours to  prove,  by  several  arguments,  that  God  laid  our 
sins  upon  Christ,  by  constituting  him  surety,  and  from  no 
necessity  of  nature  :  but  even  this  effort  is  of  no  service  to 
his  cause,  for  this  we  by  no  means  deny,  so  that  his  labour 
is  entirely  superfluous.  At  length,  however,  in  the  progress 
of  the  dispute,  this  learned  gentleman  advances  some  argu- 
ments that  seem  suitable  to  his  purpose. 

'  We  readily  grant,'  says  he,  *  upon  supposition,  that 
Christ  was  made  our  surety  by  the  decree  of  God,  that  he 
could  not  be  but  punished  by  God,  and  yet  freely,  as  God 
created  the  world  of  mere  free  will,  though  necessarily,  in 
respect  of  his  immutability ;  for  it  cannot  be  that  a  free 
action  should  impose  on  God  a  natural  or  physical  necessity 
of  doing  any  thing.' 

We  have  shewn  before  what  kind  of  a  necessity  we  as- 
cribe to  God,  in  punishing  sins.  It  is  not  an  inanimate  or 
merely  physical  necessity,  as  if  God  acted  from  principles  of 
nature  in  a  manner  altogether  natural,  that  is,  without  any 
intervening  act  of  understanding  or  will ; '  for  he  worketh  all 
things  according  to  the  counsel  of  his  will.'  But  it  is  such 
a  necessity  as  leaves  to  God  an  entire  concomitant  liberty 
in  acting ;  but  which  necessarily,  by  destroying  all  antece- 
dent indifference,  accomplishes  its  object,  viz.  the  punish- 
ment of  sin,  the  justice,  holiness,  and  purity  of  God,  so  re- 
quiring. But  this  necessity,  though  it  hindereth  not  the 
divine  liberty,  any  more  than  that  which  is  incumbent  on 
God  of  doing  any  thing  in  consequence  of  a  decree  from  the 
immutability  of  his  nature  ;  yet  it  arises  not  from  a  decree, 
but  from  things  themselves,  particularly  constituted,  and 
not  as  the  other  kind  of  necessity  from  a  decree  only :  and 
therefore,  in  those  things  which  God  does  necessarily, merely 
from  the  supposition  of  a  decree,  he  has  a  regard  to  the  de- 
cree, accomplishes  the  thing  to  be  done,  antecedently  to  the 
consideration  of  any  necessity  incumbent  on  him  ;  but  in 
those  whose  necessity  arises  from  the  demand  of  the  divine 
nature,  a  decree  only  supposes  a  certain  condition  of  things. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       485 

which  being  supposed,  immediately  and  without  any  consi- 
deration of  any  respect  to  a  decree,  it  is  necessary  that  one 
or  another  consequence  should  follow.  As  for  instance,  after 
God  decreed  tliat  he  would  create  the  world,  it  was  impos- 
sible that  he  should  not  create  it,  because  he  is  immutable  : 
and  the  decree  immediately  respected  that  very  thing,  viz. 
the  creation  of  it.  But  the  necessity  of  punishing  sin  arises 
from  the  justice  and  holiness  of  God;  it  being  supposed 
that  in  consequence  of  a  decree,  a  rational  creature  existed, 
and  was  permitted  to  transgress:  but  he  punishes  the  trans- 
gression which  he  decreed  to  permit,  because  he  is  just,  and 
not  only  because  he  decreed  to  punish  it.  The  necessity 
then  of  creating  the  world  arises  from  a  decree ;  the  neces- 
sity of  punishing  sin  from  justice. 

'  But  it  is  impossible,'  says  Rutherford, '  that  a  free  action 
can  impose  a  natural  or  physical  necessity  of  doing  any 
thing  upon  God.' 

But  by  a  free  action  it  can  be  proved,  that  certain  things 
may  be  placed  in  such  a  condition,  that  God  could  not  but 
exercise  certain  acts  towards  them,  on  account  of  the  strict 
demand  of  some  attribute  of  his  nature,  though  not  from  a 
physical  and  insensible  necessity,  which  excludes  all  liberty 
of  action  :  for  it  being  supposed,  that  in  consequence  of  a 
free  decree  God  willed  to  speak  with  man,  it  is  necessary 
from  the  decree  that  he  should  speak  ;  but  that  he  should 
speak  truth  is  necessary  from  the  necessity  of  his  nature. 
Supposing  then  a  free  action,  in  which  he  hath  decreed  to 
speak,  a  natural  necessity  of  speaking  truth  is  ineumbent 
on  God,  nor  c?'"  he  do  otherwise  than  speak  truth.  Sup- 
posing sin  +  md  that  God  willed  to  do  any  thing  with 
regard  ^  ugh  perhaps  this  is  not  in  consequence 

of  a  .jecessary,  by  necessity  of  nature,  that  he 

should  do  justice  ;  that  is,  that  he  should  punish  it :  '  for 
the  righteous  judgment  of  God  is,  that  they  who  do  such 
things,'  viz.  who  commit  sin,  'are  worthy  of  death.'  There 
are  certain  attributes  of  the  Deity,  which  have  no  egress  but 
towards  certain  objects  particularly  modified  ;  for  they  do 
not  constitute  or  create  objects  to  themselves,  as  other  di- 
vine attributes  do;  but  these  objects  being  once  constituted 
by  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will,  they  must  necessarily,  for 
such  is  their  nature  and  manner,  be  exercised. 


480        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

What  this  learned  writer  farther  adds  in  support  of  his 
argument,  is  founded  on  a  mistaken  idea  of  the  subject  in 
question  :  for  as  the  necessity  of  punishing  sin  arises  from 
the  right  and  justice  of  God,  it  is  by  no  means  necessary 
that  he  should  punish  it  in  one  subject  more  than  in  an- 
other, but  only  that  he  should  punish  it ;  and  that  thereby 
his  right  may  be  restored,  and  his  justice  satisfied. 

The  second  argument  of  this  learned  writer  is  this  :  '  As 
God  freely  has  mercy  on  whom  he  will,  for  he  is  under  ob- 
ligation to  none,  and  yet  mercy  is  essential  to  him ;  so  God 
does  not,  by  any  necessity  of  nature,  owe  punishment  to  a 
sinner  :  although  then  man  owe  obedience  to  God,  or  a  vi- 
carious compensation  by  means  of  punishment  from  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  decree  ;  yet  those  who  say,  that  God,  by  neces- 
sity of  nature,  owes  the  good  of  punitory  justice  to  the  uni- 
verse, which  were  he  not  to  execute,  he  would  not  be  God ; 
those,  I  say,  indirectly  deny  the  existence  of  a  God.' 

Although  any  one  may  perceive  that  these  assertions  are 
unsubstantial,  unfounded,  and  more  obscure  than  even  the 
books  of  the  Sybils  ;  we  shall,  however,  make  a  few  obser- 
vations upon  them.  In  the  first  place,  then,  it  must  be  abun- 
dantly clear  from  what  has  been  already  said,  that  mercy 
and  justice  are  different  in  respect  of  their  exercise ;  nor 
need  we  now  farther  insist  on  that  point.  But  how  this  learn- 
ed man  will  prove  that  sparing  mercy,  which  as  only  the  na- 
ture of  the  thing  itself  requires,  but  even  the  Socinians  with 
the  orthodox  agree,  ought  to  be  viewed  in  the  same  light  as 
punitory  justice,  is  essential  to  God,  when  he  affirms  puni- 
tory justice  to  exist  in  God  freely,  I  cannot  conjecture:  but 
as  there  is  no  one  who  doubts  but  that  God  does  all  things 
for  the  glory  and  manifestation  of  his  own  essential  attri- 
butes, why  it  should  be  more  acceptable  to  him  in  his  admi- 
nistration respecting  sin  committed,  to  exercise  an  act  of  the 
will  purely  free,  no  excellence  of  his  nature  so  requiring, 
than  of  an  essential  property''  to  do  in  all  respects  whatsoever 
he  pleaseth  ;  and  to  spread  abroad  its  glory,  it  will  be  diffi- 
cult to  assign  a  reason.  God,  I  say,  has  a  proper  regard  for 
the  glory  of  his  attributes ;  and  as  mercy  earnestly  and 
warmly  urges  the  free  pardon  of  sins,  if  no  attribute  of  the 
divine  nature  required  that  they  should  be  punished,  it  is 

''  Viz.  Mercy. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.       487 

strange,  that  God,  by  an  act  of  his  will,  entirely  free,  should 
have  inclined  to  the  contrary.  But  we  have  shewn  before 
that  the  Scriptures  lay  a  more  sure  foundation  for  the  death 
of  Christ. 

Secondly,  God  does  not  owe  to  the  sinner  punishment 
from  a  necessity  of  nature,  but  he  owes  the  infliction  of  pu- 
nishment on  account  of  sin,  to  his  own  right  and  justice  ; 
for  thence  the  obligation  of  a  sinner  to  punishment  arises  ; 
nor  is  the  debt  of  obedience  in  rational  creatures  resolvable 
into  a  decree  in  any  other  respect  than  as  it  is  in  consequence 
of  a  decree,  that  they  are  rational  creatures. 

In  the  third  place,  the  conclusion  of  this  argument  would 
require  even  the  Delian  swimmer's  abilities  to  surmount  it ; 
so  very  puzzling  and  harsh  is  the  diction,  that  it  is  difficult 
to  make  any  sense  of  it;  for  what  means  that  sentence, 
•That  God,  by  a  necessity  of  nature,  owes  the  goodof  puni- 
tory justice  to  the  universe.'  The  good  of  the  universe  is  the 
glory  of  God  himself:  '  to  owe  then  the  good  of  punitory 
justice  to  the  universe,'  is  to  owe  the  good  of  an  essential 
attribute  to  his  own  glory.  But  again.  What  is  'the  good  of 
punitory  justice  ?'  Justice  itself,  or  the  exercise  of  it?  nei- 
ther can  be  so  called  with  any  propriety.  But  if  the  learned 
author  mean  this,  that  God  ought  to  preserve  his  own  right 
and  dominion  over  the  universe,  and  that  this  is  just,  his 
nature  so  requiring  him,  but  that  it  cannot  be  done,  sup- 
posing sin  to  exist  without  the  exercise  of  punitory  justice; 
and  then  that  those  who  affirm  this,  indirectly  deny  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  this  is  easy  for  any  one  to  assert,  but  not  so 
easy  to  prove. 

This  learned  author's  third  argument  is  taken  from  some 
absurd  consequences  which  he  supposes  to  follow  from  our 
opinion  ;  for  he  thus  proceeds  to  reason;  *  Those  who  teach 
that  sin  merits  punishment,  from  a  necessity  of  the  divine 
nature,  without  any  intervention  of  a  free  decree,  teach  at 
the  same  time,  that  God  cannot  forbid  sin  to  man,  without 
necessarily  forbidding  it  under  the  penalty  of  eternal  death. 
'As  if,'  says  he,  *  when  God  forbids  adultery  or  theft  in  a  human 
court,  he  forbid  them  with  a  modification  of  the  punishment, 
namely,  that  theft  should  not  be  punished  with  death,  but 
by  a  quadruple  restitution,  he  could  not  forbid  them  with- 
out any  sanction  of  a  punishment,  and  as  he  commands 


488        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

these  to  be  punished  by  men,  because  they  are  sins,  why 
cannot  he  for  the  same  reason  manage  matters  so  in  his  own 
internal  court,  and  suspend  all  punishment;  and  neverthe- 
less forbid  the  same  transgressions  V 

A  fine  shew  of  reasoning;  but  there  is  no  real  solid  truth 
in  it ;  for  all  is  false. 

In  what  sense  sin  deserves  punishment  from  the  neces- 
sity of  the  divine  nature,  we  have  already  shewn  at  large. 
Neither,  however,  do  we  think  ourselves  bound  to  teach, 
that  God  could  not  forbid  sin  but  under  the  penalty  of  eter- 
nal death :  for  we  hold  that  not  one  or  another  kind  of  pu- 
nishment is  necessary;  but  that  punishment  itself  is  neces- 
sary, and  the  punishment,  according  to  the  rule  of  God's 
wisdom  and  justice  is  death.  Moreover,  a  rational  creature, 
conscious  of  its  proper  subjection  and  obediential  depen- 
dance,  being  created  and  existing,  God  did  not  account  it  at 
all  necessary  to  forbid  it  to  sin  by  a  free  act  of  his  will,  under 
one  penalty  or  another ;  for  both  these  follow  from  the  very 
situation  of  the  creature,  and  the  order  of  dependance,  viz. 
that  it  should  not  transgress  by  withdrawing  itself  from  the 
right  and  dominion  of  the  Creator ;  and  if  it  should  trans- 
gress, that  it  should  be  obnoxious,  and  exposed  to  coercion 
and  punishment.  But  it  being  supposed  that  God  should 
forbid  sin  by  an  external  legislation,  the  appointment  of  pu- 
nishment, even  though  there  should  be  no  mention  made 
of  it,  must  be  coequal  with  the  prohibition. 

'But  God,'  says  he,*  in  his  human  court,  forbids  sin  by  a 
modification  of  the  punishment  annexed ;  as  for  instance, 
theft,  under  the  penalty  of  a  quadruple  restitution ;  why 
may  he  not  do  likewise  in  his  own  internal  court,  and  con- 
sequently suspend  all  punishment  V 

There  is  no  need  of  much  disputation,  to  prove  that 
there  is  nothing  sound  or  substantial  in  these  arguments. 
The  modification  of  punishment  respects  either  its  appoint- 
ment or  infliction.  Punishment  itself  is  considered  either 
in  respect  of  its  general  end,  which  is  the  punishment  of 
transgression,  and  has  a  regard  to  the  condition  of  the  crea- 
tures with  respect  to  God ;  or  in  respect  of  some  special 
end,  and  has  a  respect  to  the  condition  of  the  creatures 
among  themselves.  But  whatever  modification  punishment 
may  undergo,  provided  it  attains  its  proper  end,  by  accom- 


A     DISSERTATION     ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE.         489 

plishin^'  the  object  in  view,  the  nature  of  punishment  is  pre- 
served no  less  than  if  numberless  degress  were  added  to  it. 
As  to  the  establishment  of  punishment,  then,  in  a  human 
court,  as  it  has  not  primarily  and  properly  a  respect  to  the 
punishment  of  transgression,  nor  a  regard  to  the  condition 
of  the  creatures,  with  respect  to  God;  but  with  respect  to 
one  another,  that  degree  of  punishment  is  just,  which  is  fit 
and  proper  for  accomplishing  the  proposed  end. 

The  punishment  then  of  theft,  by  a  quadruple  restitution 
had,  in  its  appointment,  no  such  modification  conjoined 
with  it,  as  could  render  it  unfit  and  improper  in  respect  of 
the  end  proposed,  among  that  people  to  whom  that  law  con- 
cerning retributions  was  given  ;  but  as  the  infliction  of  pu- 
nishment, according  to  the  sentence  of  the  law,  depended 
on  the  supreme  ruler  of  that  people,  it  belonged  to  him  to 
provide,  that  no  temporal  dispensation  with  punishment, 
exercised  by  him,  in  right  of  his  dominion,  should  turn  out 
to  the  injury  of  the  commonwealth. 

But  hence  this  learned  writer  concludes,  'That  in  his 
own  internal  forum,  God  may  modify  and  suspend  punish- 
ment.' 

We  can  only  conjecture  what  he  means  by  the  internal 
court  of  God.  From  the  justice  of  God  the  appointment  of 
punishment  is  derived ;  but  that  is  improperly  called  a  court. 
How  far  God  is  at  liberty,  by  this  justice,  to  exercise  his 
]30wer  in  pardoning  sins,  the  Scriptures  shew.  The  just 
right  of  God  is,  that '  they  who  commit  sin  are  worthy  of 
death ;'  '  but  he  may  modify  the  punishment,'  says  our  au- 
thor. But  not  even  in  a  human  court  can  any  such  modi- 
fication be  admitted,  as  would  render  the  punishment  use- 
less in  respect  of  its  end;  nor  in  respect  of  God  do  we  think 
any  degree  or  mode  of  punishment  necessary,  but  such  as 
may  answer  the  end  of  the  punishment,  so  far  as  respects 
the  state  of  the  creatures  with  respect  to  God.  Nor  is  any 
argument  from  a  human  court  applied  to  the  divine  justice  ; 
nor  from  the  modification  the  suspension  for  a  limited  time  ; 
nor  from  a  suspension  to  the  total  punishment;  all  which 
this  learned  author  supposes,  of  any  force. 

The  sum  of  the  whole  is  this  ;  as  we  have  laid  it  down, 
that  God  must  necessarily,  from  his  right  and  justice,  in- 
flict punishment  on  sin,  so  far  as  this  punishment  tends  to 

vol,.  IX.  2  K 


490  A     DISSERTATION'    OX    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

preserve  the  state  of  the  creature's  dependance  on  its  Cre- 
ator, and  proper  and  natural  Lord  ;  so  whatever  constitu- 
tions or  inflictions  of  punishment,  with  any  particular  mo- 
dification or  dispensation  we  have  admitted,  do  not,  as  the 
supreme  judgment  of  all  is  reserved  to  the  destined  time,  at 
ail  operate  against  our  opinion. 

The  other  reasons  advanced  by  this  learned  author  in 
support  of  this  argument,  are  not  of  sufficient  weight  to  merit 
attention.  It  hath  been  clearly  proved  already,  that  the 
supposition  of  the  pardon  of  sin,  without  an  intervening  sa- 
tisfaction, implies  a  contradiction,  though  not  in  the  terms, 
in  the  very  thing  itself.  Nor  does  it  follow  that  God  can, 
without  any  punishment,  forgive  sin  ;  to  avoid  which,  all 
rational  creatures  are  indispensably  bound,  from  his  natural 
right  over  them ;  because  any  distinguished  action  among 
mankind,  to  the  performance  of  which  they  are  bound  by 
no  law,  may  be  rewarded  ;  there  being  no  threatening  of 
punishments  for  the  neglect  of  it,  annexed,  that  has  a  re- 
spect to  a  privilege  not  due  :  by  such  consequences,  drawn 
from  such  arguments,  the  learned  gentleman  will  neither  es- 
tablish his  own  opinion,  nor  prejudice  ours. 

He  proceeds  in  the  fourth  place  :  '  God,'  says  he, '  worketh 
nothing  without  himself,  from  a  necessity  of  nature.'  This 
objection  hath  been  already  answered,  by  a  distinction  of 
necessity  into  that  which  is  absolute,  and  that  which  is 
conditional ;  nor  shall  we  now  delay  the  reader,  by  repeat- 
ing what  has  been  said  elsewhere.  *  But  to  punish  sin/ says 
he, '  is  not  in  any  respect  more  agreeable  to  the  divine  nature, 
than  not  to  punish  it ;  but  this  is  an  act  of  grace  and  liberty  ; 
that  is,  an  act  which  God  freely  exerciseth.' 

But,  according  to  Rutherford, '  it  is  much  more  disagree- 
able,' to  speak  in  his  own  words, '  to  the  divine  nature,  to  pu- 
nish sin,  than  not  to  punish  it ;  for  not  to  punish  it,  or  to 
forgive  it,  proceeds  from  that  mercy  which  is  essential;  but 
to  punish  it,  from  that  justice  which  is  a  free  act  of  the  di- 
vine will ;  but  such  things  as  are  natural  and  necessary  have 
a  previous  and  weightier  influence  with  God,  than  those 
which  are  free  and  may  or  may  not  take  place.'  Our  learned 
author  means,  that  setting  aside  the  consideration  of  his 
free  decree,  God  is  indifferent  to  inflict  punishment,  or  not 
inflict   it.      But  by  what  argument  will    he  maintain  this 


A    DISSERTATION     OX     DIVINE    JUSTICE.         491 

absurd  expression  ?  Does  it  follow  from  this,  that  God  is 
said  ill  Scripture,  to  restrain  his  anger,  and  not  to  cut  off 
the  wicked  ?  But  surely  he  is  not  ignorant  that  such  de- 
clarations of  divine  grace  have  either  a  respect  to  Christ,  by 
whom  satisfaction  for  sin  was  made ;  or  only  denote  a  tem- 
poral suspension  of  punishment,  till  the  day  of  public  and 
general  retribution. 

In  the  fifth  place,  he  maintains,  '  that  a  natural  necessity 
will  admit  of  no  dispensation,  modification,  or  delay,  which 
however,  it  is  evident,  that  God  either  uses,  or  may  use,  in 
the  punishment  of  sin.' 

Ans.  With  respect  to  absolute  necessity,  which  excludes 
all  liberty,  perhaps  this  is  true  ;  but  with  respect  to  that  ne- 
cessity which  we  maintain,  which  admits  of  a  concomitant 
liberty  in  acting  ;  it  is  altogether  without  foundation. 
Again,  a  dispensation  with,  or  delay  of  punishment,  regards 
either  temporary  punishment,  with  which  we  grant  that  God 
may  freely  dispense ;  when  the  immediate  end  of  that  pu- 
nishment hath  not  a  respect  to  the  creatures,  in  that  state  of 
subjection  which  they  owe  to  God  ;  or  eternal  punishment, 
and  in  respect  of  that,  the  time  of  inflicting  it,  &c.  and  freely 
to  appoint  it  belongs  entirely  to  God  ;  but  that  he  should 
inflict  the  punishment  itself,  is  just  and  necessary. 

Nor  does  that  instance,  brought  from  the  various  de- 
grees of  punishment,  at  all  avail  him,  viz.  '  That  if  God  can 
add  or  take  away  one  degree  of  punishment,  then  he  may 
two,  and  so  annihilate  the  whole  punishment :'  for  we  are 
speaking  of  punishment,  as  it  includes  in  it  the  nature  of 
punishment,  and  is  ordained  to  preserve  God's  right  and 
dominion  over  his  creatures,  and  to  avenge  the  purity  and 
holiness  of  God ;  not  of  it,  as  in  consequence  of  the  divine 
wisdom  and  justice  being  this  or  that  kind  of  punishment, 
or  consisting  of  degrees  ;  for  thus  far  extends  that  liberty 
which  we  ascribe  to  God  in  the  exercise  of  his  justice,  that 
it  belongs  to  him  entirely  to  determine  according  to  the 
counsel  of  his  will,  with  regard  to  the  degrees,  mode,  and 
time  to  be  observed  in  the  infliction  of  punishment ;  and  no 
doubt  but  a  proportion  of  the  punishment  to  the  faults  is 
observed ;  so  that  by  how  much  one  sin  exceeds  another  in 
quality^  by  so  much  one  punishment  exceeds  another  pu- 
nishment in  degree  ;  and   in  the  infliction  of  punishment, 

2  K  2 


492         A     DISSKRTAnON    ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

God  has  a  respect  to  the  comparative  demerit  of  sins  among 
themselves',     We  acknowledge,  indeed,  that  God  acts  dif- 
ferently with  persons  in  the  same  situation  ;  but  not  without 
a  respect  to  Christ  and  his  satisfaction.     The  satisfaction 
of  Christ  is  not  indeed   the  cause  of  that  decree,  by  which 
he  determined  such  a  dispensation  of  things;  but  the  me- 
diation of  Christ,  '  who  was  made  sin   for  those  to  whom 
their  sins  are  not  impnted,'  is  the  foundation  for  the  actual 
administration  of  the  whole  of  that  decree,  respecting  that 
part  of  it  which  consists  in  the  dispensation  of  free  grace 
and  sparing  mercy.     What  this  learned  writer  adds,  namely, 
'That  not  to  punish  is  sometimes  an  act  of  severe  justice  ; 
and  that  therefore,  God  does  notpur-ish  from  a  necessity  of 
nature,'   is  grossly  sophistical  ;  for  not  to  punish  denotes 
either  the  total  removal  of  punishment  altogether,  as  is  the 
case  with   the  elect,    for  whom   Christ  died  ;  which,  so  far 
from  being  an  act  of  severe  justice,  that  this  learned  man 
will  not  deny  to  proceed  from  the  highest  grace  and  mercy; 
or  it  denotes  only  a  suspension   of  some  temporal  punish- 
ment, and  for  a  short  time  ;  to  the  end  that  sinners  may  fill 
up  the  measure  of  their  iniquity.     But  this  is  not,  properly 
speaking,  not  to  punish,  but  to  punish  in  a  different  manner, 
and  in  a  manner  more  severe  than  that  to  which  it  succeeds. 
What  observations  our  learned  author  adds  in  the  close 
of  his  arguments,  are  either  sophistical  or  very  untheological. 
He  says,   viz.  'That  God,  influenced  by  our  prayers,  averts 
even  an  eternal  punishment  after  that  we  have  deserved  it  :* 
but  what?     Is  it  to  be  imputed  to   our  prayers,    that  God 
averts  from  us  the  wrath  to  come  ?     What  occasion  is  there, 
pray  then,  for  the  satisfaction  of  Christ  ?    We  have  hitherto 
i)een  so  dull  and  stupid  as  to  believe,  that  the  turning  away 
from  us  of  punishment,  which  has  a  respect  to  our  faith  and 
prayers,  consisted  in  the  dispensation  of  grace,  peace,  and 
the  remission  of  the  sins,  for  which  Christ  made  satisfaction  ; 
and  that  God  averted  from  us  no  deserved  punishment  but 
what  was  laid   upon  Christ ;  '  who  hath  redeemed  us   from 
the  curse  of  the  law,  by  being  made  a  curse  for  us.' 

In  his  proofs  of  the  sixth  argument,  which  this  learned 
author  adds  to  his  former  from  Twiss,  he  says,  '  There  is 
neither  reason,  nor  any  shadow  of  reason  in  it,  that  the  delay 
of  punishment,  or  a  dispensation  with    it,  as  to  time  and 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        493 

manner,  can  be  determined  by  the  free  good  pleasure  of  God, 
either  one  way  or  other  ;  if  to  punish,  or  punishment  in 
itself,  and  absolutely  considered,  be  necessary.' 

We  have  explained  before  what  were  our  sentiments,  as 
to  what  relates  to  the  distinction  between  punishment  simply 
considered,  and  attended  with  particular  circumstances  in 
the  manner  of  its  infliction.  We  affirm,  that  a  punishment 
proportioned  to  sin,  according  to  the  rule  of  the  divine  jus- 
tice, from  God's  natural  right,  and  from  his  essential  justice 
and  holiness,  is  necessarily  inflicted  to  vindicate  his  glory, 
establish  his  government,  and  preserve  his  perfections  entire 
and  undiminished :  and  God  himself  hath  revealed  to  us,  that 
this  just  recompense  of  reward  consists  in  death  eternal; 
*  for  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  is,  that  they  who  com- 
mit sin  are  worthy  of  death.'  It  is  just,  then,  and  conse- 
quently necessary  ,thatthat  punisliment  ofdeath,  viz,  eternal, 
should  be  inflicted  :  but  as  God,  though  a  consuming  fire, 
is  a  rational  or  intellectual  fire,  who  in  exercising  the  ex- 
cellencies or  qualities  of  his  nature,  proceeds  with  reason 
and  understanding,  it  is  free  to  him  to  appoint  the  time, 
manner,  and  such-like  circumstances  as  must  necessarily  at- 
tend that  punishment  in  general,  so  as  shall  be  most  for  his 
own  glory,  and  the  more  illustrious  display  of  his  justice. 
But  when  Rutherford  says,  '  That  there  is  neither  any  rea- 
son, or  shadow  of  reason  in  this  ;'  let  us  see  what  solidity 
there  is  in  the  arguments  by  which  he  supports  his  assertion. 

'The  determination  of  an  infernal  punishment,  as  to  its 
manner  and  time,  and  consequently  as  to  its  eternal  duration, 
will  then  depend  on  the  mere  good  pleasure  of  God  :  there- 
fore, God  can  determine  the  end  and  measure  of  infernal 
punishment ;  and  therefore  he  is  able  not  to  punish,  and  to 
will  not  farther  to  punish  those  condemned  to  eternal  tor- 
ments ;  therefore  it  is  not  of  absolute  necessity  that  he  pu- 
nishes.' But  here  is  nothing  but  dross,  as  the  saying  is, 
instead  of  a  treasure.  The  time  concerning  which  we  speak, 
is  of  the  infliction  of  punishment,  not  of  its  duration.  He 
who  asserts,  that  an  end  may  be  put  to  eternal  punishments, 
expressly  contradicts  himself:  we  say,  that  God  hath  re- 
vealed to  us,  that  the  punishment  due  to  every  sin,  from  his 
right  and  by  the  rule  of  his  justice,  is  eternal:  nor  could 
the  thing  in  itself  be  otherwise,  for  the  punishment  of  a  finite 


494        A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

and  sinful  creature  could  not  otherwise  make  any  compen- 
sation for  the  guilt  of  its  sin  ;  but  as  it  is  certain,  that  God 
in  the  first  threatening,  and  in  the  curse  of  the  law,  observed 
a  strict  impartiality,  and  appointed  not  any  kind  of  punish- 
ment, but  what  according  to  the  rule  of  his  justice,  sin  de- 
served ;  and  as  the  apostle  testifies,  *  That  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God  is,  that  they  who  commit  sin,  are  worthy 
of  death  :'  and  we  acknowledge  that  death  to  be  eternal, 
and  that  an  injury  done  to  God,  infinite,  in  respect  of  the 
object,  could  not  be  punished  in  a  subject  in  every  respect 
finite,  otherwise  than  by  a  punishment  infinite  in  respect  of 
duration;  that  the  continuation  or  suspension  of  this  punish- 
ment, which  it  is  just  should  be  inflicted,  does  not  undermine 
the  divine  liberty,  we  are  bold  to  affirm  ;  for  it  is  not  free  to 
God  to  act  justly  or  not.  But  we  have  shewn  before  how 
absurd  it  is  to  imagine  that  the  divine  omnipotence  suffers 
any  degradation;  because  upon  this  supposition  he  must  ne- 
cessarily preserve  alive  a  sinful  creature  to  all  eternity,  and 
be  unable  to  annihilate  it. 


CHAP.  XVIII. 

Tlie  conclusion  of  this  dissertation.  The  use  of  the  doctrine  herein  vindi- 
cated. God's  hatred  against  sin  revealed  in  various  ivays.  The  dreadful 
effects  of  sin  all  over  the  creation.  Enmity  between  God  and  every  sin. 
Threateninys  and  the  punishment  of  sin  appointed.  The  description  of 
sin  in  the  sacred  Scriptures.  To  what  great  miseries  tve  are  liable 
through  sin.  The  excellency  of  grace,  in  pardoning  sin  through  Christ. 
Gratitude  and  obedience  due  from  the  pardoned.  An  historical  fact  con- 
cerniny  Tiyranes,  king  of  Armenia.  Christ  to  be  loved  for  his  cross 
above  all  things.  The  glory  of  God's  justice  revealed  by  this  doctrine  ; 
and  also  of  his  tvisdom  and  holiness. 

Let  us  at  length  put  an  end  to  this  dispute ;  and  as  all 
'acknowledging  of  the  truth  ought  to  be  after  godliness,'" 
we  shall  adduce  such  useful  and  practical  evident  conclu- 
sions, as  flow  from  this  truth  which  we  have  thus  far  set 
forth  and  defended,  that  we  may  not  be  thought  to  have 
spent  our  labour  in  vain. 

First,  then,  Hence  we  sinners  may  learn  the  abominable 

*  Titus  i.  5. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.        495 

nature  of  sin.  Whatever  there  is  in  heaven  or  in  earth  that 
we  have  seen,  or  of  which  we  have  heard  ;  whatever  declares 
the  glory  of  the  Creator,  also  exposes  this  disgraceful  fall  of 
the  creature.  The  genuine  offspring  of  sin  are  death  and 
liell ;  '  for  sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth  forth  death.' 
That  the  heavens  cast  out  their  native  inhabitants,  viz.  '  the 
angels,  who  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  who  left  their 
own  habitations,"'  &c.  That  the  earth  is  filled  with  darkness, 
resentments,  griefs,  malediction,  and  revenge,  is  to  be  attri- 
buted entirely  to  this  cankerous  ulcer  of  nature.  Hence 
*  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven.'  The  earth,'= 
lately  founded  by  a  most  beneficent  Creator,  is  cursed 
Hence  the  old  world,  having  but  just  emerged  from  the  de- 
luge, '  when  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  which  now  are,  by  . 
the  same  word  are  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire  against 
the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men.''' 

Yea,  forasmuch  as  in  this  state  of  things  which  we  have 
described,  as  being  permitted  by  the  will  of  God,  'the  crea- 
ture was  made  subject  to  vanity,'  there  is  none  of  the  crea- 
tures, which  by  its  confusion,  vanity,  and  inquietude,  does 
not  declare  this  detestable  poison  with  which  it  is  tho- 
roughly infected,  to  be  exceeding  sinful.  This  is  the  source 
and  origin  of  all  evils  to  sinners  themselves  ;  whatever  dark- 
ness, tumult,  vanity,  slavery,  fearful  looking  for  of  judgment, 
and  fiery  indignation  to  consume  the  adversaries,  oppresses, 
tortures,  harasses,  vexes,  burns,  corrupts,  or  kills  ;  what- 
ever from  without,  penal,  grievous,  sad,  dire,  dreadful,  even 
the  last  unavoidable  calamity  itself,  is  all  to  be  attributed 
to  this  prolific  parent  of  miseries.  Some  one  perhaps  will 
wonder  what  this  so  great  a  plague  is,  which  perverts  the 
course  of  the  creation;  what  crime,  what  kind  of  inexpiable 
wickedness,  that  it  hath  procured  to  creatures,  so  very  highly 
exalted,  and  created  in  the  image  of  God,  to  share  of  his 
glory,  after  being  banished  from  heaven  and  paradise,  an 
eternal  deprivation  of  his  glory,  punishment  to  which  no 
measure  or  end  is  appointed ;  what  hath  so  incensed  the 
mind  of  the  most  bountiful  and  merciful  Father  of  all,  and 
imbittered  his  anger,  that  he  should  bring  eternal  sorrows 
on  the  work  of  his  own  hands,  '  and  kindle  a  fire  that  should 

^  James  i.  15.  Jude  6.  =  Gen.  iii.  17.  ''  2  Pet.  iii.  7.  Rom.  viii.  20. 


496         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

burn  to  the  lowest  bottom,  and  inflame  the  foundations  of 
the  mountains?'   I  will  tell  him  in  one  word. 

Is  it  to  be  wondered  at,  that  God  should  be  disposed  se- 
verely to  punish  that  which  earnestly  wishes  him  not  to  be 
God,  and  strives  to  accomplish  this  with  all  its  might?  Sin 
opposes  the  divine  nature  and  existence ;  it  is  enmity 
against  God,  and  is  not  an  idle  enemy  ;  it  has  even  engaged 
in  a  mortal  war  with  all  the  attributes  of  God.  He  would 
not  be  God  if  he  did  not  avenge,  by  the  punishment  of  the 
guilty,  his  own  injury.  He  hath  often  and  heavily  com- 
plained in  his  word,  that  by  sin  he  is  robbed  of  his  glory 
and  honour,  affronted,  exposed  to  calumny  and  blasphemy ; 
that  neither  his  holiness,  nor  his  justice,  nor  name,  nor 
right,  or  dominion,  are  preserved  pure  and  untainted.  For 
he  hath  created  all  things  for  his  own  glory,  and  it  belongs 
to  the  natural  right  of  God  to  preserve  that  glory  entire  by 
the  subjection  of  all  his  creatures,  in  their  proper  stations, 
to  himself:  and  shall  we  not  reckon  that  sin  is  entirely  de- 
structive of  that  order  which  would  entirely  wrest  that  right 
out  of  his  hands,  and  a  thing  to  be  restrained  by  the  se- 
verest punishments  ?  Let  sinners  then  be  informed,  that 
every  the  least  transgression  abounds  so  much  with  hatred 
against  God,  is  so  highly  injurious  to  him  ;  and  so  far  as  is 
in  its  power,  brands  him  with  such  folly,  impotence,  and  in- 
justice ;  so  directly  robs  him  of  all  his  honour,  glory,  and 
power,  that  if  he  wills  to  be  God,  he  can  by  no  means  suffer 
it  to  escape  unpunished. 

It  was  not  for  nothing  that  on  that  day  on  which  he 
made  man  a  living  soul,  he  threatened  him  with  death,  even 
eternal  death  ;  that  in  giving  his  law,  he  thundered  forth  so 
many  dread  execrations  against  this  fatal  evil :  that  he  hath 
threatened  it  with  such  punishment,  with  so  great  anger, 
with  fury,  wrath,  tribulation,  and  anguish  :  that  with  a  view 
to  vindicate  his  own  glory,  and  provide  for  the  salvation  of 
sinners,  he  made  his  most  holy  Son,  '  who  was  holy,  harm- 
less, undefiled,  and  separate  from  sinners,'  sin  and  a 
curse ;®  and  subjected  him  to  that  last  punishment,  the  death 
of  the  cross,  including  in  it  the  satisfaction  due  to  his  vio- 
lated law.     All  these  things  divine  justice  required  as  neces- 

'  Hcb.  xi.2.  7.  ^2Cor.  V.  21.  Gal.  iii.  13. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         497 

sary  to  the  preservation  of  his  honour,  glory,  wisdom,  and 
dominion  :  let  every  proud  complaint  of  sinners  then  be 
hushed  ;  *  for  we  know  that  the  judgment  of  God  is  accord- 
ing to  truth  against  them  that  do  evil.'*^ 

But  sin,  in  respect  of  the  creature,  is  folly,  madness,  fury^ 
blindness,   hardness,    darkness,    stupor,   giddiness,   torpor, 
turpitude,  uncleanness,  nastiness,  a  stain,  a  spot,  an  apostacy, 
degeneracy,  a  wandering  from   the  mark,  a  turning  aside 
from  the  right  path,  a  disease,  a  languor,  destruction,  death. 
In  respect  of  the  Creator,  it  is  a  disgrace,  an  affront,  blas- 
phemy, enmity,  hatred,  contempt,  rebellion,  an  injury.     In 
respect  of  its  own  nature  it  is   poison,  a  stench,  dung,  a 
vomit,  polluted  blood,  a  plague,  a  pestilence,  an  abominable 
thing,  a  curse ;  which,  by  its  most  pernicious  power  of  me- 
tamorphosing, hath  transformed   angels   into   devils,  light 
into  darkness,  life  into  death,  paradise  into  a  desert,  a  plea- 
sant, fruitful,  blessed  world  into  a  vain,  dark,  accursed  prison; 
and  the  Lord  of  all,  into  a  servant  of  servants  :  which  hath 
rendered  man,  the  glory  of  God,  an  enemy  to  himself,  a  wolf 
to  others,  hateful  to  God,  his  own  destroyer,  the  destruction 
of  others,  the  plague  of  the  world,  a  monster,  and  a  ruin  ; 
attempting  to  violate  the  eternal,  natural,  and  indispensable 
right  of  God,  to  cut  the  thread  of  the  creature's  dependance 
on  the  Creator,  it  introduced  with  it  this  world  of  iniquity. 
First,  then,  to  address  you,  who  live,  or  rather  are  dead, 
under  the  guilt,  dominion,  power,  and  law  of  sin :  how  shall 
ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell?    The  judgment  of  God  is, 
that  they  who  commit  those  things,  to  which  you  are  totally 
given  up,  and  which  you  cannot  refrain  from,  are  worthy  of 
death.     '  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God  :'s  since  it  is  a  just  thing  with  him,  *  to  render  to 
every  one  according  to  his  works  :'  and  who  shall  deliver 
you  out  of  his  mighty  hand  ?    Wherewith  can  the  wrath  to 
come  be  averted?  Wherewithal  can  you  make  atonement  to 
so  great  a  judge?    Sacrifices  avail  nothing;  hence  those 
words  in  the  prophet,  which  express  not  so  much  the  lan- 
guage of  inquiry,  as  of  confusion  and  astonishment:  'Where- 
withal shall  I  come  before  the  Lord,  and  bow  myself  before 
the  Most  High  God  ?    Shall  I  come  before  him  with  burnt 
offerings,  with  calves  of  a  year  old  ?  Will  the  Lord  be  pleased 

'  Rom.  ii.  2.  s  Heb.  x.  31. 


498         A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

with  thousands  of  rams,  or  with  ten  thousands  of  rivers  of 
oil  ?  Shall  I  give  my  first-born  for  my  transgressions,  the 
fruit  of  my  body  for  the  sin  of  my  soul  ?'  Would  you  at- 
tempt an  obedience,  arduous  and  expensive  beyond  all  cre- 
dibility ?  By  such  dreadful  propitiations,  by  such  dire  and 
accursed  sacrifices,  at  the  thought  of  which  human  nature 
shudders,  would  you  appease  the  offended  Deity  ?  You  are 
not  the  first  whom  a  vain  superstition  and  ignorance  of  the 
justice  of  God  hath  forced  to  turn  away  their  ears  from  the 
sighs  and  cries  of  tender  infants,  breathing  out  their  very 
vitals,  your  own  blood,  in  vain.  These  furies,  which  now 
by  starts,  agitate  us  within,  will,  by  their  vain  attempts 
against  the  snares  of  death,  torment  us  to  all  eternity  :  for 
God,  the  judge  of  all,  will  not  accept  of  '  sacrifice,  or  offer- 
ing, or  burnt-offerings  for  sin ;  with  these  he  is  not  at  all 
delighted ;  for  the  redemption  of  the  soul  is  precious,  and 
ceaseth  for  ever.""  God  cannot  so  lightly  esteem  or  disrsr- 
gard  his  holiness,  justice,  and  glory,  to  which  your  sins 
have  done  so  great  an  injury,  that  he  should  renounce  them 
all  for  the  sake  of  hostile  conspirators;  unless  there  should 
be  some  other  remedy  quickly  provided  for  us  ;  unless  the 
judge  himself  shall  provide  a  lamb  for  a  burnt-offering  ;  un- 
less the  gates  of  a  city  of  refuge  shall  be  quickly  opened  to 
you,  exclaiming  and  trembling  at  the  avenging  curse  of  the 
law,  unless  you  can  find  access  to  the  horns  of  the  altar.  If 
God  be  to  remain  blessed  for  ever,  you  must  doubtless  pe- 
rish for  ever.  If  then,  you  have  the  least  concern  or  anxiety 
for  your  eternal  state,  hasten,  '  while  it  is  called  to-day,  to 
lay  hold  on  the  hope  that  is  set  before  you.'  Give  your- 
selves up  entirely  to  him ;  receive  him  'whom  God  hath  set 
forth  as  a  propitiation,  through  faith  in  his  blood;  that  he 
might  declare  his  righteousness.'  But  what,  and  how  bitter 
a  sense  of  sin,  how  deep  a  humiliation,  contrition,  and  de- 
jection of  heart  and  spirit,  what  self-hatred,  condemnation, 
and  contempt,  what  great  self-indignation  and  revenge ; 
what  esteem,  what  faith  in  the  necessity,  excellence,  and 
dignity  of  the  righteousness  and  satisfaction  of  Christ,  es- 
pecially if  God  hath  graciously  condescended  to  bestow  his 
Holy  Spirit,  to  convince  men's  hearts  of  sin,  of  righteous- 
ness, and  of  judgment  (without  whose    effectual  aid  and 

■"  Psal.  Ixix.  8. 


A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE.         499 

heart-changing  grace,  even  the  most  apposite  remedies  ap- 
plied to  this  disease,  will  be  in  vain),  and  to  excite  and  work 
such  sentiments  concerning  the  transgression  of  the  divine 
law,  the  nature  of  sin,  or  the  disobedience  of  the  creatures. 
A  persuasion  how  fit  and  proper,  those  who  have  spiritual 
eyes  will  easily  perceive. 

To  those  happy  persons,  '  whose  sins  are  forgiven,  and 
to  whom  God  will  not  impute  iniquity,'  because  he  hath  laid 
their  transgressions  upon  Christ,  the  knowledge  of  this  di- 
vine truth  is  as  a  spur  to  quicken  them  to  the  practice  of 
every  virtue,  and  to  sincere  obedience  :  for  in  what  high, 
yea,  infinite  honour  and  esteem  must  God  be  held  by  him, 
who,  having  escaped  from  the  snares  of  death  and  the  de- 
struction due  to  him,  through  his  inexpressible  mercy,  hath 
thoroughly  weighed  the  nature  of  sin,  and  the  consequences 
of  it,  which  we  have  mentioned  before?  for  whosoever  shall 
reflect  with  himself,  that  such  is  the  quality  and  nature  of 
sin,  and  that  it  is  so  impiously  inimical  to  God,  that  unless 
by  some  means  his  justice  be  satisfied  by  the  punishment  of 
another,  he  could  not  pardon  it,  or  let  it  pass  unpunished, 
will  even  acknowledge  himself  indebted  to  eternal  love  for 
the  remission  of  the  least  transgression ;  because  in  inex- 
pressible grace  and  goodness  it  hath  been  forgiven.  And 
hence  too  we  may  learn,  how  much  beyond  all  other  objects 
of  our  affection,  we  are  bound  to  love  with  our  heart  and 
soul,  and  all  that  is  within  us,  our  dear  and  beloved  deliverer, 
and  most  merciful  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  '  who  hath  deli- 
vered us  from  the  wrath  to  come.' 

When  Tigranes,  son  of  the  king  of  Armenia,  had  said  to 
Cyrus  that  he  would  purchase  his  wife's  liberty  at  the  price 
of  his  life,  and  she  was  consequently  set  free  by  Cyrus ; 
while  some  were  admiring  and  extolling  one  virtue  of  Cyrus, 
and  some  another  ;  she  being  asked  what  she  most  admired 
in  that  illustrious  hero,  answered,  '  My  thoughts  were  not 
turned  upon  him.'  Her  husband  again  asking  her,  *  Upon 
whom  then  ?'  She  replied, '  Upon  him  who  said  that  he  would 
redeem  me  from  slavery  at  the  expense  of  his  life.'  Is  not 
he  then  to  be  caressed  and  dearly  beloved,  to  be  contem- 
plated with  faith,  love,  and  joy,  who  answered  for  our  lives 
with  his  own  ;  devoted  himself  to  punishment :  and  at  the 
price  of  his  blood,  '  while  we  were  yet  enemies,'  pui'chased 


500       A    DISSERTATION    ON    DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

US,  and  rendered  us  '  a  peculiar  people  to  himself?'  We, 
now  secure,  may  contemplate  in  his  agony,  sweat,  tremor, 
horror,  exclamations,  prayers,  cross,  and  blood,  what  is 
God's  severity  against  sin,  what  the  punishment  of  the 
broken  law  and  curse  are.  Unless  God,  the  Judge  and  Ruler 
of  all,  after  having  thoroughly  examined  the  nature,  hearts, 
breasts,  ways,  and  lives  of  us  all,  had  thence  collected  what- 
ever was  contrary  to  his  law,  improper,  unjust,  and  impure  ; 
whatever  displeased  the  eyes  of  his  purity,  provoked  his 
justice,  roused  his  anger  and  severity,  and  laid  it  all  on  the 
shoulders  of  our  Redeemer,  and  condemned  it  in  his  flesh; 
it  had  been  better  for  us,  rather  than  to  be  left  eternally  entan- 
gled in  the  snares  of  death  and  of  the  curse,  never  to  have 
enjoyed  this  common  air,  but  to  have  been  annihilated  as 
soon  as  born.  'Wretched  men  that  we  are,  who  shall  deliver 
us'  from  this  most  miserable  state  by  nature  ?  '  Thanks  be  to 
God,  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.'  May  we  always  then 
be  'sick  of  love,'  towards  our  deliverer;  may  he  always  be 
our  'beloved,  who  is  white  and  ruddy,  and  the  chiefest  among 
ten  thousand.' 

The  acknowledging  of  this  truth  has  a  respect  not  only  to 
the  manifestation  of  his  justice,  but  also  of  the  wisdom,  holi- 
ness,anddominion  of  God  over  his  creatures  :  for  thatjustice, 
which  in  respect  of  its  effect  and  egress  we  call  vindicatory, 
which  as  we  have  before  demonstrated  is  natural  to  God,  and 
essential ;  and  therefore  absolutely  perfect  in  itself,  or  rather 
perfection  itself;  this  very  truth,  which  we  have  thus  far  de- 
fended, evidently  illustrates  :  as  also  his  supreme  rectitude  in 
the  exercise  of  it,  'when  he  sits  on  his  throne  judging  righte- 
ously;'  and  how  severe  a  judge  he  will  be  towards  impenitent 
sinners,  whose  sins  are  not  expiated  in  the  blood  of  Christ. 
That  justice  is  not  a  free  act  of  the  divine  will,  which  God 
may  use  or  renounce  at  pleasure  ;  nor  is  sin  only  a  debt  of 
ours,  which  as  we  were  unable  to  pay,  he  might  forgive,  by 
only  freely  receding  from  his  right:  for  what  reason  then 
could  be  assigned  why  the  Father  of  mercies  should  so  se- 
verely punish  his  most  holy  Son  on  our  account,  that  he 
might,  according  to  justice,  deliver  us  from  our  sins;  when 
without  any  difficulty,  by  one  act  of  his  will,  and  that  too  a 
most  free  and  holy  act,  he  could  have  delivered  both  him- 
self, and  us  wretched  sinners,  from  this  evil  ?  But  it  exists 


A     DISSERTATION     ON     DIVIN'K    JUSTICE.        50] 

in  God  in  the  manner  of  a  habit,  natural  to  the  divine  es- 
sence itself,  perpetually  and  immutably  inherent  in  it; 
which,  from  his  very  nature,  he  must  necessarily  exercise  in 
every  work  that  respecteth  the  proper  object  of  his  justice  ; 
for  sin  is  that  ineffable  evil,  which  would  overturn  God's 
whole  right  over  his  creatures,  unless  it  were  punished.  As 
then  the  perfection  of  divine  justice  is  infinite,  and  such  as 
God  cannot  by  any  means  relax,  it  is  of  the  last  importance 
to  sinners  seriously  and  deeply  to  bethink  themselves  how 
they  are  to  stand  before  him. 

Moreover,  the  infinite  wisdom  of  God,  the  traces  ofwhich 
we  so  clearly  read  in  creation,  legislation,  and  in  the  other 
works  of  God,  are  hereby  wondrously  displayed,  to  the  eter- 
nal astonishment  of  men  and  angels  :  for  none  but  an  infi- 
nitely wise  God,  could  bring  it  about,  that  that  which  in  its 
own  nature  is  opposite  to  him,  inimical,  and  full  of  obsti- 
nacy, should  turn  out  to  his  highest  honour,  and  the  eternal 
glory  of  his  grace.  Yea,  the  divine  wisdom  not  only  had 
respect  to  God  himself,  and  to  the  security  of  his  glory,  ho- 
nour, right,  and  justice,  but  even  provided  for  the  good  of 
miserable  sinners,  for  their  best  interests,  exaltation,  and  sal- 
vation ;  and  from  the  impoisoned  bowels  of  sin  itself.  '  Out 
of  the  eater  came  forth  meat,  and  out  of  the  strong  came 
forth  sweetness  ;'  by  interposing  a  surety  and  covenant- 
head  between  sin  and  the  sinner;  between  the  transgression 
of  the  law  and  its  transgressor,  he  condemned  and  punished 
sin,  restored  the  law,  and  freed  the  sinner  both  from  sin, 
and  from  the  law.  '  He  hath  abounded  towards  us  in  all 
wisdom  and  prudence  ;'  Eph.  i.  8.  '  When  he  made  all  men 
see  what  is  the  fellowship  of  the  mystery,  which  from  the 
beginning  of  the  world  hath  been  hid  in  God  ;'  chap.  iii.  9. 
*  For  in  Christ  Jesus  all  the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge are  hid  ;'  Col.  ii.  3. 

It  will  be  read  and  attended  to,  as  an  eternal  miracle  of 
God's  providence,  that  he  should  have  made  the  captivity, 
or  wicked  sale  of  Joseph,  by  means  of  so  many  windings 
perplexed  mazes,  and  strange  occurrences,  issue  at  last  in 
his  own  exaltation  and  the  preservation  of  his  brethren,  who 
impiously  sold  him.  But  if  any  one,  though  endowed  with 
the  tongues  of  angels  and  of  men,  should  attempt  to  describe 
this  mystery  of  divine  wisdom,  whereby  it  is  evident  that 


502        A    DISSERTATION     ON     DIVINE    JUSTICE. 

God  exalts  his  own  name,  and  not  only  recovers  his  former 
honour,  but  even  raises  it,  manifests  his  justice,  preserves 
inviolable  his  right  and  dominion  in  pardoning  sin,  where- 
with he  is  highly  pleased,  and  incredibly  delighted  (and 
unless  this  heavenly  discovery,  a  truly  God-like  invention, 
had  intervened,  he  could  not  have  pardoned  even  the  least 
sin),  he  must  feel  his  language  not  only  deficient,  but  the  eye 
of  the  mind  overpowered  with  light,  will  fill  him  with  awe 
and  astonishment :  that  that  which  is  the  greatest,  yea,  the 
only  disgrace  and  affront  to  God,  should  turn  out  to  his 
highest  honour  and  glory  ;  that  that  which  could  not  be  per- 
mitted to  triumph  without  the  greatest  injury  to  the  justice, 
right,  holiness,  and  truth  of  God,  should  find  grace  and 
pardon  to  the  eternal  and  glorious  display  of  justice,  right, 
holiness,  and  truth,  was  a  work  that  required  infinite  wisdom  : 
an  arduous  task,  and  every  way  worthy  of  God. 

Finally.  Let  us  constantly  contemplate  in  the  mirror  of 
this  truth,  the  holiness  of  God,  whereby  '  he  is  of  purer  eyes 
than  to  behold  evil  :  in  whose  presence  the  wicked  shall  not 
stand :'  that  we  ourselves  may  become  more  pure  in  hearty 
and  more  holy  in  life,  speech,  and  behaviour. 


END    OF    VOL.    IX. 


Printed  by  J.  F.  Dove,  St.  John's  Square.